Monthly Archives: April 2014

9 Months of Talks, 9 Months of Settlement Development

Peace Now


“During the 9 months of Secretary Kerry’s efforts in the region, the Netanyahu Government promoted plans and tenders for at least 13,851 housing units in the settlements and East Jerusalem –
an average of 50 units per day and 1,540 units per month.


The 13,851 units include:

Tenders for 4,868 units – 2,248 of them in West Bank settlements and 2,620 units in East Jerusalem. (The were also tenders for another 1,235 units in re-issued tenders, where the tenders are calls for bids to buy units that weren’t sold in previous tenders).

Promotion of plans for 8,983 units – 6,561 of them in West Bank settlements and 2,422 in East Jerusalem.


The plans were in all West Bank areas:

Plans for 4,793 units in isolated settlements (73%)

Plans for 1,768 units in settlements closer to the Green Line (27%)


The average yearly number of tenders was 4 times higher compared to previous years:




Doubling the number of construction Starts:

According to the Israeli CBS data, in the second half of year 2013, some 828 new units were started to be built in the settlements, while at the equivalent time in 2012, only 484 units started. (the CBS data does not include the first three months of 2014).


New Settlements and Outposts:

Two new outposts were established – the Brosh outpost at the Jordan Valley and Givat Eitam, south of Bethlehem.

A New settlement at the heart of the City of Hebron was established for the first time since the 80’s.

Four outposts were legalized by promoting plans for them: Nahalei Tal and Zayit Ra’anan (near Ramallah), Givat Sal’it (in The Jordan Valley) and Elmatan (near Qalqilya).

A new settlement was founded, when 60 families moved in to live in the settlement of Leshem near Salfit.

In East Jerusalem – two big tourist projects in the Palestinian neighborhood of Silwan were promoted (the Kedem compound and the Spring House), and the National Park at the lands of Issawiya was approved.

In addition, the Ministry of Housing published tenders for preparing plans for 24,000 units in several settlements in the West Bank, including in E1. Following the publication by Peace Now, the tenders were cancelled.


Peace Now: Not only that the construction and the announcements of settlements were destructive for the American efforts and for the faith between the two sides, it also created facts on the ground that proved more than anything else that the Netanyahu Government did not mean to go for a two states solution but rather acted in order to strengthen the Israeli control over the Occupied Territories”.


List of tenders and plans according to settlement: Can be seen here,






Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Apartheid;In West Bank, Israeli and Palestinian teens arrested for rock throwing face different fates

BEIT UMAR, West Bank – The boys were both 15, with the crackly voices and awkward peach fuzz of adolescence. They lived just a few minutes away from one another in the West Bank. And both were accused of throwing stones at vehicles, one day after the other.

But there was a crucial difference that helped to shape each boy’s fate: One was Israeli, and the other Palestinian.

The tale of the two teens provides a stark example of the vast disparities of Israel’s justice system in the West Bank, a contested area at the heart of the elusive search for a lasting peace.

While Israeli settlers in the West Bank fall mostly under civilian rule, Palestinians are subject to Israeli military law. Israeli and Palestinian youths face inequities at every stage in the path of justice, from arrests to convictions and sentencing, according to police statistics obtained by The Associated Press through multiple requests under Israel’s freedom of information law.

The results can ripple for years.


“Jail destroyed his life,” said the Palestinian boy’s father.

Only 53 Israeli settler youths were arrested for stone-throwing over the past six years, the data shows, and 90 percent were released without charge. Five were indicted. Four of those were found “guilty without conviction,” a common sentence for Israeli juveniles that aims not to stain their record. The fifth case was still in court as of October, the most recent information available.

By contrast, 1,142 Palestinian youths were arrested by police over the same period for throwing stones, and 528 were indicted. All were convicted. Lawyers say the penalty is typically three to eight months in military prison.

Israel’s Justice Ministry said more than five Israeli stone-throwers were indicted in the past six years, but declined to provide examples. Itzik Bam, a lawyer who represents Israeli settler youths, said he knew of 20 Israeli minors in the West Bank indicted for stone-throwing in recent years, including six who pleaded guilty and six who were cleared. He said the other cases are still in court.

The police numbers are not comprehensive, because the Israeli army also arrests Palestinian youths, and because the state prosecutor also issues indictments against settlers in more serious cases. However, the gap between the numbers for Israelis and Palestinians is clear and wide.

Israel’s Justice Ministry said the numbers reflect the fact that Palestinians threw more stones than Israelis, rather than unequal treatment.

“Though the legal systems are different — military court versus civil court — the relevant law is implied impartially,” said Yehuda Shefer, a deputy state prosecutor who is head of a Justice Ministry committee for West Bank law enforcement.

The Israeli Justice Ministry says it would like to rehabilitate Palestinian youth, but ends up jailing many offenders because their parents and leaders support their crimes. However, critics accuse Israel of dismissing Israeli crimes as youthful indiscretions, while treating Palestinian youths like hardened criminals.

“Everyone knows there is a problem with the treatment of minors in the West Bank, a systematic discrimination between Israeli minors and Palestinian minors,” said Michael Sfard, an Israeli attorney and Palestinian human rights defender. “Now you have the figures to prove that.”


Stones have become an iconic weapon in the West Bank, an arid land where they are plentiful. In the past six years, more than half of all arrests of Palestinian youth have been over stone-throwing, which Israel claims can be the first step toward militancy. Extremist Israeli settlers have also adopted the tactic.

On Feb. 20, 2012, the Israeli boy joined a group of youths pelting a bus with rocks at the entrance to Bat Ayin, according to police reports. The settlement, located in the southern West Bank between Jerusalem and the biblical city of Hebron, is known for its hardline population.

Police said they targeted the bus because the driver was Arab. The rocks damaged the bus but did not harm the driver.

The boy, whose name cannot be published under local law because he is a minor, was brought to the Hebron region police station at 9 p.m., with his father by his side. In his interrogation, the boy invoked his right to remain silent. He spent a night in the station and four days under house arrest. Then he was freed without charge.

The following day, according to police reports, the Palestinian boy lobbed rocks at Israeli cars zipping past his hometown of Beit Umar, a farming town of 14,000 people perched near an Israeli military tower. Police said he and others wanted to show solidarity with a high-profile Palestinian prisoner on hunger strike in an Israeli jail.

The rocks shattered the front windshield of a white Mazda and damaged three other vehicles on a busy highway. There were no injuries. The incident was caught on tape and broadcast on Israeli evening news.

Two weeks later, at 3:30 a.m., Israeli soldiers kicked down the door to the Palestinian boy’s bedroom, carried him to a jeep, blindfolded him and tied his hands behind his back with plastic handcuffs, he said. He was slapped by soldiers, kept awake all night and placed in a military jail cell with 10 other Palestinian youths, he said.

It would be more than nine months before he could go free.

An Israeli psychological exam conducted in prison found the boy showed signs of anxiety and depression. He told the prison’s clinical psychologist and social worker that he looked at a photo of his family to help him sleep, and had nightmares about soldiers killing his relatives. The exam also found he was short-breathed and had a cough, which he said was from soldiers hitting him in the chest during his arrest.


The West Bank, an expanse of rocky hilltops blanketed in olive trees, is central to the current round of U.S.-brokered peace talks. For Palestinians, the West Bank is the heart of a future state, along with adjacent east Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip. For Israel, the land known by its biblical name of Judea and Samaria is significant to Jewish heritage and to security.

Since Israel captured the West Bank in 1967, it has built more than 100 settlements, creating “facts on the ground” that complicate any future withdrawal. Some 60 percent of the West Bank is under full Israeli control.

Today, more than 350,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, amid roughly 2.5 million Palestinians. The two sides have little interaction, and for the most part live under separate — and often unequal — systems of law.

While the Palestinian Authority governs day-to-day affairs, the Israeli military wields overall control. Palestinians need Israeli permission to enter Israel or to travel abroad through the Jordanian border. Palestinians frequently suffer from poor roads, creaky infrastructure and water shortages.

Israeli settlers, by contrast, are Israeli citizens. They are subject to Israeli law, vote in Israeli elections, move freely in and out of Israel and have access to Israel’s modern infrastructure. They serve in and are protected by the Israeli army.

Israel says that extending its laws to Palestinians would be tantamount to annexation, and that many of the restrictions, such as military checkpoints, are needed for security. Paul Hirschson, a spokesman for the Israeli Foreign Ministry, said Israel tries to help the Palestinians but acknowledged the setup as problematic.

“We’re stuck in this interim status and it’s not good,” he said. “This is precisely the reason we need to resolve this thing through negotiations.”

Israel’s Ministry of Justice says it attaches “great importance” to narrowing the differences in the law regarding juvenile detainees. In 2009, Israel created a juvenile military court. In 2011, it raised the age of minority for Palestinian youth from 16 to 18. And in 2013, it shortened the amount of time a West Bank Palestinian minor can be held under detention, from eight days to, in most cases, one or two days — still double the time allowed for an Israeli minor.

“In our perspective, a minor is a minor,” the Justice Ministry said in a statement.


The Israeli boy’s journey through the justice system was one of repeated second chances. The middle child of a psychologist mother and a psychiatrist father, he lived and studied at a religious school in Bat Ayin, a rural community of about 200 families.

After his release from jail, the case remained closed until he was arrested again. This time, he was accused of attacking two Palestinians with pepper spray while in possession of a knife and a slingshot decorated with the words “Revenge on Arabs.”

During a court hearing on the pepper spray charge, prosecutors brought up his previous rock-throwing arrest. Only then was he indicted for both offenses.

The Israeli minor pleaded guilty to pepper-spraying but denied throwing rocks. He was put under house arrest for nine months.

While at home, he prepared for Israeli national matriculation exams. During the final three months, he was permitted to attend school. Then he was freed. It was nearly two years after the alleged stone-throwing incident that he finally stood trial, which is ongoing.

There was no such leniency for the Palestinian boy. The youngest of four brothers, he grew up in a modest cement home surrounded by bougainvillea plants and verdant farm lands. He liked to play basketball. His lawyer would only permit the AP to identify him by his first name, Zein.

Zein’s father, a short man with a cigarette perched under his mustache and a forehead carved with lines, described the boy as a B-plus student who could have gone on to a professional career.

That all changed after his arrest. While many Palestinian prisoners accept plea bargains in exchange for reduced imprisonment, the boy pleaded innocent and went to trial. After nine and a half months in prison, he was put under house arrest. Seven months later, he was convicted and sentenced to time already served.

In the ruling, the judge criticized the police interrogator for not asking the boy if he understood his rights, and not giving him the opportunity to consult with his lawyer or parents.

“It appears from the interrogation in this case that the Israeli police do not understand the sensitivity obligated in interrogating juvenile suspects,” military judge Shahar Greenberg wrote.

Requests for response from the Israeli police were not answered.


In the end, the Israeli and the Palestinian teens had one thing in common: Despite Israel’s stated goals, neither was rehabilitated. Instead, both were embraced by communities that condone stone-throwing.

After his release from house arrest, the Israeli boy joined an extremist group known as the “Hilltop Youth” and moved to an unauthorized settlement outpost called Hill 904. These defiant, ideological Jewish teens squat on West Bank hilltops, and attack Palestinians and their property. There was a big celebration when he arrived, the boy said.

He built makeshift homes on the hill for six months and studied Jewish law with his comrades. Then he moved to another outpost. And another. And another.

He still denies throwing rocks, but said it was an acceptable tactic to fight Palestinians, citing a teaching by an extremist rabbi. He described himself as a warrior in an ideological battle for Jewish control of the West Bank.

“Wherever soldiers are needed, I go,” he mumbled outside the courtroom after a recent hearing. He wore the settler youth uniform of long side locks and tattered cargo pants, with a few chin hairs of adolescence. “We are commanded to inherit the land, and to expel (Palestinians).”

When the Palestinian boy got out of jail, he rejoined his 10th-grade class at the end of the school year, but couldn’t catch up and dropped out. For a while he tried to sell knock-off shoes hoarded in his bedroom. Now he mopes around his parents’ house, not doing much of anything.

“My school wanted me to go back to classes, but I quit,” he said with a shrug, sitting in his parents’ living room in sandals, with greased hair.

His lawyer, Neri Ramati, is appealing the conviction, while prosecutors are seeking a tougher sentence of six more months in jail.

His father, Hisham, said Palestinians have every right to throw stones to achieve independence. He said he and two other sons were all arrested by Israel when they threw stones, unlike his youngest son, who claims innocence.

His father’s conclusion? “He’s a coward.”



Palestinians: 1,142

Israelis: 53


Palestinians: 46 percent.

Israelis: Six cases, or 11 percent.


Palestinians: 100 percent

Israelis: Four found guilty but not convicted. One was cleared. Fate of last case unknown.”


Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The US-Sponsored “Peace Process”

For more than two decades, the United States has maintained a monopoly on mediating Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. During this time, the situation of most Palestinians living in the occupied territories has deteriorated steadily while Israel’s domination over their lives has become ever more entrenched. More than 20 years after the US-sponsored “peace process” began, the creation of an independent Palestinian state – the ostensible endgame of negotiations – is more distant than ever, and Israel’s nearly 47-year-old discriminatory occupation regime becomes more permanent by the day. The following fact sheet provides an overview of the US role in the “peace process” and the consequences it has had for the Palestinians


Over twenty years of peace talks, the United States has consistently sided with Israel on virtually every major issue while overlooking or downplaying illegal and provocative Israeli actions, even when they contradict official US policy and undermine the negotiations process.

In 2005, former State Department official Aaron David Miller, who advised six secretaries of state and played a key role in peace efforts under President Bill Clinton, published an op-ed in the Washington Post lamenting the biased way in which US officials handle negotiations. In the piece, entitled “Israel’s Lawyer,” Miller wrote:

“For far too long, many American officials involved in Arab-Israeli peacemaking, myself included, have acted as Israel’s attorney, catering and coordinating with the Israelis at the expense of successful peace negotiations. If the United States wants to be an honest and effective broker on the Arab-Israeli issue, than surely it can have only one client: the pursuit of a solution that meets the needs and requirements of both sides.”

Individuals associated with the pro-Israel lobby group the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the think tank it established, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), have played central roles overseeing the “peace process” for the US, including:

Martin Indyk: A former deputy director of research for AIPAC, Indyk co-founded WINEP and served as its Executive Director from 1985 to 1993. He served in several senior positions in the Clinton administration, including as ambassador to Israel, and played an important role in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations as an advisor to the president. In 1992, then-president of AIPAC, David Steiner, was recorded during a phone conversation referring to Indyk as an asset within then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign, stating:

“We gave two employees from AIPAC leave of absences to work on the campaign. I mean, we have a dozen people in that campaign, in the headquarters… In Little Rock, and they’re all going to get big jobs. We have friends AIPAC. I also work with a think tank, the Washington Institute [WINEP]. I have Michael Mandelbaum and Martin Indyk being foreign policy advisers. Steve Speigel—we’ve got friends—this is my business…”

Indyk also helped set up and served as the director of the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution, a think tank established by Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban. Saban has declared, “I’m a one-issue guy, and my issue is Israel” and openly acknowledged his desire to influence American policy in favor of Israel.

In July 2013, US Secretary of State John Kerry appointed Indyk Special Envoy for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations for the Obama administration. He currently serves as US mediator in the talks.
Dennis Ross: Co-founder of WINEP with Indyk, Ross played a major role in negotiations during the Clinton administration and is known as a strong supporter of Israel. According to one Palestinian negotiator, at times Ross was “more Israeli than the Israelis themselves.” In 2009, Obama appointed
Ross to a senior position at the State Department and then named him as his Special Assistant and a Senior Director for the Central Region (which includes the Middle East) at the National Security Council. During his time in the Obama administration, Ross clashed repeatedly with George Mitchell, Obama’s special envoy to Israel/Palestine. The two reportedly refused to speak to one another at times, “partly over Ross’ tendency to hold talks with Israeli officials behind Mitchell’s back,” according to Israel’s Haaretz newspaper. Mitchell tendered his resignation in May 2011, while Ross left his position in November 2011 and returned to WINEP.


David Makovsky: A senior fellow and director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process at WINEP and a former executive editor of The Jerusalem Post, Makovsky took a leave of absence from WINEP after being appointed by President Obama to serve as an assistant to Indyk in November 2013. Makovsky is probably best known for creating a set of maps
of possible two-state solution scenarios, all of which allow Israel to keep most of its illegal settlements, including so-called “blocs” that effectively dissect the West Bank into cantons and sever it from occupied East Jerusalem. In exchange, the Palestinians would receive an equal amount of Israeli territory, most of it less valuable and strategically important land in the Negev (Naqab to Palestinians) desert. In an op-ed
in The New York Times in June 2013, Makovsky called on the European Union to “get tough” with the Palestinians and force them into talks with Israel, despite the fact that the current Israeli government is the most hardline right-wing in Israel’s history and is fundamentally opposed to the creation of a genuinely independent Palestinian state in the occupied territories.

The US gives Israel more than $3 billion (USD) in military aid annually. This huge US-taxpayer provided subsidy allows Israel to direct massive resources to its illegal settlement enterprise and repressive military occupation of Palestinian lands, the ending of which is supposed to be the goal of negotiations. Between 2009 and 2018, the US is scheduled to give Israel $30 billion in military aid.

The US provides vital diplomatic cover to Israel at the UN and other international forums, allowing Israel to evade legal consequences for its violations of international law and abuses of Palestinian rights. The US has used its Security Council veto 42 times since 1972 to protect Israel from censure over its illegal actions such as settlement building and the systematic use of disproportionate military force, most recently in February 2011 when the Obama administration vetoed a resolution condemning settlement construction.


President Bill Clinton
Prior to 1992, successive US governments had voted at the United Nations to reaffirm Security Council Resolution 194, which calls for the right of return for Palestinian refugees to homes and lands they were expelled from during Israel’s creation in 1948. Under the Clinton administration, the US changed policy regarding the internationally recognized Palestinian right of return to something to be negotiated between the parties, at first abstaining from voting on 194, then voting against it beginning in 1998.

During President Clinton’s two terms in office (1993-2001), Israel almost doubled the number of Jewish settlers living illegally on occupied Palestinian land in the West Bank (not including East Jerusalem), from 110,900 to 190,206, according to Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem. Unlike his predecessor, President George H.W. Bush, who applied significant pressure
to Israel to agree to a settlement freeze, Clinton took no action to slow the massive expansion of Israel’s settlement enterprise at a time when Israel was supposedly negotiating an end to its occupation, severely undermining Palestinian confidence in the political process and in America’s role as a peace maker.

In July 2000, in the waning months of his time in office, and after failing to stop Israel’s massive expansion of settlements on occupied Palestinian land and other violations of Palestinian rights over the previous seven years, Clinton convened the Camp David summit with PLO Chairman and PA President Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Fearing that he was being lured into a trap where he would be pressured by the US and Israel into signing an unfair and unworkable agreement, Arafat sought and received assurances
from Clinton that if talks didn’t succeed responsibility for the failure wouldn’t be attributed to the Palestinians. When Palestinian concerns proved warranted and talks failed after Clinton and Barak attempted to corner Arafat into a bad deal, Clinton broke his word, publicly placing all blame on Arafat, thus helping to create the “no Palestinian partner for peace” myth propagated by Israeli and US politicians for much of the next decade. Former senior State Department official Aaron David Miller would later write: “What we ended up doing was advocating Israel’s positions before, during and after the summit.”

President George W. Bush
During his eight years in office (2001-2009) President George W. Bush continued Clinton’s strategy of appeasing Israel, the stronger party, rather than confronting the Israeli government over its violations of international law and flouting of US policy in regard to settlement construction, home demolitions, and other matters.

In 2004, Bush sent a letter to then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in which he:
Began to support the idea that the Palestinians should formally recognize Israel as a “Jewish state,” even though doing so would undermine the rights of Palestinian refugees and Palestinian citizens of Israel, who make up about 20% of Israel’s population. Previously, the US and Israel had only demanded that Palestinians recognize Israel’s “right to exist” without reference to its ethnic or religious character, which they did in 1988 and again in 1993.

Implicitly recognized Israeli control over some Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land, including so-called “blocs,” which divide Palestinian population centers in the occupied West Bank into isolated cantons and sever the West Bank from occupied East Jerusalem.

Declared that Palestinian refugees should be resettled in a future Palestinian state instead of being allowed to exercise their legal right of return to homes and lands inside Israel’s pre-1967 borders which they were ethnically cleansed from in 1948.

Referring to the “Road Map to Peace” put forward by his administration in 2002, Bush added, “the United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other [peace] plan.”

President Barack Obama
Although some critics have accused President Obama of being insufficiently supportive of Israel and the government of Prime Minister Netanyahu, or even outright hostile to them, a close examination of his record shows that, apart from briefly calling for a complete settlement freeze and then backing down, he has been extremely supportive of Israel both diplomatically and militarily while doing little to rein in Israeli human rights abuses.

In terms of the “peace process,” since assuming office in 2009, Obama has:
Appointed Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk, and David Makovsky, all former employees of AIPAC and/or the think tank it created, WINEP, to senior positions in his administration and the US team overseeing negotiations. Indyk currently acts as US mediator between the two parties while Makovsky is his deputy.

Taken up Israel’s demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a “Jewish state,” thereby acquiescing in the permanent subjugation of Palestinian and other non-Jewish citizens of Israel as second-class citizens and implicitly negating the rights of Palestinian refugees. (In March 2014 Secretary of State Kerry began backing away from insisting on the demand after it had become a major obstacle in negotiations.)

Vocally and aggressively opposed the “delegitimization” of Israel in the international arena by human rights activists and others seeking to hold Israel to account for its human rights abuses by using nonviolent tools like boycott, divestment, and sanctions.

Vetoed a UN Security Council resolution in February 2011 condemning Israeli settlement construction, even though the resolution was in accordance with official US policy going back decades and even though Obama had himself previously called on Israel to freeze settlement construction.

Following the expiration of a 10-month partial slowdown in settlement construction in September 2010, the Obama administration offered the Israeli government a massive bribe to continue its “freeze” for just 90 more days. The offer reportedly
included giving the Israelis 20 F-35 fighter jets worth $3 billion and assurances that the US would continue to veto any UN Security Council resolution critical of Israel. It also reportedly included a promise not to demand any further cessation in settlement construction after the three months expired, meaning that if true the Obama administration would have effectively abandoned official American policy opposing settlements going back more than 40 years. The Netanyahu government turned down the offer, choosing instead to continue settlement construction without further delay.

Legitimizing Apartheid: The Kerry Peace Initiative
Shortly after taking up his post as Secretary of State in February 2013, John Kerry began a major push for a resumption of negotiations, applying pressure to both sides to return to the table. Refusing to freeze the construction of illegal settlements on occupied Palestinian land, as the Palestinians had insisted, Israel instead chose to release 104 long-serving Palestinian prisoners (who were supposed to be freed years ago as part of the Oslo Accords) in four stages. In exchange, PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas agreed to return to talks without a settlement freeze and not to advance the cause of Palestinian statehood or Israeli accountability by joining international organizations or treaties while negotiations were ongoing. Talks resumed in late July 2013 with Kerry setting out a nine-month deadline ending on April 29, 2014 for reaching a comprehensive peace agreement.

In late December 2013, following months of fruitless talks during which time Israel approved thousands of new settlement units and carried out numerous other provocations, reports began to surface that Kerry was lowering his expectations, from reaching a full peace agreement by the end of April 2014 to achieving a “framework” agreement that would allow the two parties to negotiate past the nine-month deadline. Although news reports varied on the details, the proposed framework agreement combined with the positions of previous US administrations provide a general picture of what the Obama administration’s vision of a final peace agreement might look like:
A demilitarized Palestinian “state” in the occupied territories based on the pre-1967 borders, with Israel annexing several settlement “blocs” containing
75-80% of Jewish settlers in the West Bank (excluding those in East Jerusalem), with land swaps to compensate Palestinians for the lost territory. So-called settlement “blocs” encompass a far greater amount of land than the currently existing settlement buildings within them cover and are strategically located to divide the occupied West Bank into easily controlled cantons. If Israel continues to control these areas under a peace agreement, the Palestinian “state” will consist of several isolated Bantustans, divided from one another and the outside world by walls and Israeli territory. Any land offered to the Palestinians in “swaps” is unlikely to be of the same quality as that of the land lost to the settlement blocs, which sit in strategically important
areas and on large aquifers.

At best, areas of occupied East Jerusalem that have yet to be colonized by Israel will become part of a Palestinian capital, while several hundred thousand Israeli settlers will remain in place under Israeli sovereignty.

If any at all, a small token number at most of the approximately seven million Palestinian refugees will be allowed to exercise their internationally-recognized legal right of return to lands they were expelled from during Israel’s creation, while Israel will refuse to acknowledge any responsibility for their displacement.

The Israeli state will continue to systematically privilege Jews and discriminate against its Palestinian and other non-Jewish citizens, who make up about 20% of the population, while economically and militarily dominating millions more Palestinians living in the Bantustan-like Palestinian “state.”

In return for a tiny Bantustan divided into several cantons, surrounded and dominated by Israel, Palestinians will be asked to formally end aclaims in the conflict, thereby formalizing the apartheid regime that Israel has instituted in the territories it controls between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized