The land is land seized by the Israeli government; farms, communally, publically and privately owned land.
I have seen this claim made often, yet have never seen a reliable cite for it. Do you or does anybody else have a good cite for this claim?
Fang, it’s hardly a state secret, the Israeli government has seized 60% of the land in the West Bank since 1967. Only a minuscule portion of the land of the settlemnts are built on were obtained legally.
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/israel-palestine/land/2001/large.htm (this has a map of all the land in the West Bank seized by Israel since 1967)
http://www.fmep.org/reports/2002/sr0203.html
http://www.btselem.org/Download/Land_Grab_Eng.pdf
http://www.mcc.org/areaserv/middleeast/land.html
http://www.al-bushra.org/peaceteam/map.htm
Holy shit-how do they even attempt to justify doing so?
I still contend (hope) that the settlements are just a very high level bargaining chip. Something to be given up at the last minute in order to close the deal with some very favorable consessions (perhaps no right of return or some very wattered down version).
I do agree with Abdul that this whole thing could cause WWIII and needs to be settled (no pun intended) with the highest priority. I look at Israel to take the moral high ground here and quit the “you first, no you first” adolescent bickering.
Well, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with Likoud’s long-standing positions and ideology, as well as the influence of the ‘greater Israel’ ideologues within Likoud. The above is not a safe assumption.
Well, in fact it is not adolescent bickering but a real strategy on the part of a sub-set that does not want a settlement at all, but believes they can eventually sieze the West Bank (Gaza no one gives much of a fuck about), slowly, drip, drip, drip.
they don’t.
But then again, nobody (except the palestinians) ever asks them to.
Quite the contrary, one can see justifications even here on this board.
Major lines of argument then are:
(a) It’s not really Palestinian Land, they never really owned it.
(b) Even if they did, they’re not using it productively
© We got it fair and square.
(d) Spoils of conquest.
mm, that justifies it in their eyes, not in anybody elses, though…
a) palestinians can say: you snooze you lose, Israelis were absent for 2000 years. Tough. Fin some other place.
b) yeah, so? So many other peo;le not using their land productively. Is that a reason to go and rob it?
c) I believe there arew bits they acquired legally, but that is a very small part of land they occupy at the moment.
d) So, they conquered? And that’s allowed? And they’re allowed to keep what they conquered? How fair is that?
What I was trying to say, is apart from the Israelis themselves, and perhaps people in the US, these justifications don’t wash.
They’re excuses, not justifications.
IMHO, that is.
Indeed, however they are advanced. Guin need only seach on the subject to see some of our more illustrious members advancing these arguments.
hm. Yes. They are.
Unfortunately.
What I don’t understand is, how do they justify stooping to the aggressor’s level, after being victims for 2000 years? I mean, justifying it to themselves?
They, of all people, should know that an oppressed people will never give up and/or surrender.
So, what do they think they’ll achieve?
Could a parallel be drawn between how the Israelis are with the settlements as to how the British dealt with the Irish?
I mean, just going in and seizing land and refusing to give it up, even though it rightly belongs to someone else?
I do believe that land taken in a defensive war ,West Bank from Jordan and Gaza from Egypt, is supposed to be used as a bargaining tool for peace etc. Except straight after the '67 war Jordan and Egypt gave up all claims to West Bank/Gaza leaving Israel in the situation we have today.
Settlements and annexations are poorly explained by your hypothesis.
Security concerns, Great Israel ideologues and short termism are rather more powerful explanatory items.
Since Israel didn’t take Palestinian land (it was Egyptian and Jordanian at the time), and they surrendered claim to it, is it not Israel’s land? Or is Israel supposed to step up to the plate and create a Palestine, where Egpyt and Jordan would not?
It would be helpful if Brutus might trouble himself to actualy read something, it might prevent him from saying things inordinately ignorant and uninformed.
Egypt occupied and administered Gaza, but never annexed the territories, nor granted citizenship to the Palestinians. They claimed, sometimes more honestly than not, to be acting in Palestinian interests.
Jordan is a rather more ambiguous case, but again never granted citizenship to the Palestinians, and I do not recall annexing as opposed to administering the territories.
Regardless, neither Jordanian, nor Egyptian nor Israeli occupations have been regarded by international observers, nor Palestinians, as legit.
Of course, the final point really is, even had Egypt and Jordan annexed the territories (Jordan being ambig. in this case), that hardly suddenly absolves Israel of being a good actor. That is, to take an example rather closer to your experience, just because the Serbs were mudering land grabbing bastards, doesn’t excuse the Croats from being murdering land grabbing bastards.
Both get to send generals to the Hague.
Only if you lose.
And not even then
Only if you get caught.
I’ve been to Hebron and talked with the “settlers”. Before you just rush to lump Hebron in with other “illegal” settlements, consider this.
Jews fleeing the Spanish Inquisition in 1492 moved to Hebron. There was a continuous Jewish presense there from 1492 until the Jews were massacred and expelled in 1929.
While visiting Hebron, I saw and took pictures of the 500 year old Jewish synagogue that still stands there (remodeled a few times), and I saw the graves from the 1929 massacre.
Some of the Jews that started the Hebron settlement were the same people expelled in 1929 (and children of people expelled).
So, when you suggest dismantling the “illegal” Jewish settlement in Hebron, consider that you’re ask a Jew whose family has lived in Hebron for almost 500 years (excepting the 1929-1967 jordanian occupation) to leave.
So Mhand you wouldn’t object to the Palestinian families who were expelled from Israel in 1948 from returning then?