|
ÇáÌÒíÑÉ
Home
News
Archive
Arab
Cartoons
Columnists
Documents
Editorials
Opinion Editorials
letters
to the editor
Human
Price of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine
Islam
Israeli
daily aggression on the Palestinian people
Media
Watch
Mission
and meaning of Al-Jazeerah
News Photo
Peace
Activists
Poetry
Book
reviews
Public
Announcements
Public
Activities
Women
in News
Cities,
localities, and tourist attractions
|
|
Using war to swallow Palestinian land
Sara Roy
The Daily Star, 9/23/03
The hudna, or cease-fire, between Israel and the Palestinians is predictably
over, and the horrific cycle of violence that has killed over 2,000
Palestinians and over 800 Israelis has resumed.
A major retaliatory attack was expected after Israel’s assassination on Aug.
14 of Mohammed Sidr, the head of Islamic Jihad’s military wing in Hebron.
This expected attack occurred on Aug. 19, with the suicide bombing in
Jerusalem that killed 20 Israelis, six of them children. Since then Israel
has responded with brutal violence: the assassination on Aug. 21of Ismail
Abu Shanab, a leading Hamas official, and the attempted assassination of
Mahmoud Zahar, a senior figure in Hamas, were perhaps the most visible
manifestations of Israeli retaliation, but not the only ones. Almost daily,
Palestinians are killed, injured and made homeless. Palestinian extremists
then seek revenge on innocent Israelis, recently killing 15 people and
injuring dozens more in two suicide-bombing attacks in Jerusalem and Tel
Aviv. And the violence escalates.
According to Gideon Levy, a writer for the Israeli daily Haaretz, “much as
Israel claims that the Palestinians are violating the truce and regrouping
in order to perpetrate savage acts of terror, its pleading can’t alter the
facts: Up until Israel renewed its assassinations campaign, there were no
suicide bombings, and the two attacks (at Ariel and Rosh Haayin) last week
were direct responses to the Askar refugee camp slayings (of two Hamas
activists).”
It seems obvious to some analysts, at least, that by engaging in such
provocative acts which clearly do little if anything to protect the
security of Israel’s citizens, and do a great deal to jeopardize it the
government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is deliberately trying to
undermine the diplomatic process, and thereby ensure Israel’s continued
occupation of Palestinian land and resources. Put in more poignant terms,
one Israeli observer recently wrote: “They slay Palestinians and expect them
to exercise restraint.” The recent decision by the Israeli government to
expel Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat from Palestinian areas if carried
out will further undermine, if not altogether destroy, what is left of the
diplomatic process.
However, even during the recent cease-fire and despite the Israeli Army’s
tentative withdrawal from Bethlehem and the Gaza Strip (which has again been
cut into three disconnected parts), the limited release of Palestinian
prisoners and the dismantling of a few unauthorized settlement outposts
the Sharon government pursued its policy of repressive occupation, and did
little to ease Palestinian suffering. This was nowhere more apparent than in
the continued construction of the separation wall in the West Bank. In this
regard, it is critical to understand that while the decline in terror
attacks in Israel was real and visible during the cease-fire, and Israeli
life improved as a result, no parallel improvement occurred in Palestinian
life.
In July, during the cease-fire, the first phase of the separation wall was
completed. It is now 140 kilometers long and over 200,000 Palestinians are
trapped on the “Israeli” side of the barrier. According to the Israeli
Defense Ministry and other sources, during this first phase of construction,
51 Palestinian villages were isolated from most of their land, and 25 lost
total access to their land, a critical problem for future economic survival.
In the village of Jayous, for example, 0.56 square kilometers out of 13 were
taken to build the wall, and almost 9 additional square kilometers,
two-thirds of the village’s land, now lie on the “Israeli” side of the wall.
In addition, the first phase of the wall’s construction resulted in the
massive destruction of physical assets. By December 2002, approximately six
months after the wall’s construction began, the World Bank already reported
extensive physical destruction of agricultural lands and assets. In a 2002
survey conducted in 53 communities with an estimated combined population of
141,800, the damage incurred within just a few months included the
bulldozing of 85 square kilometers of land and the destruction of around
0.62 square kilometers of irrigated agricultural land (including
greenhouses), 37.3 kilometers of water networks, and 15 kilometers of
agricultural roads.
Furthermore, according to the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committees, 11
of the 53 communities surveyed possess approximately 241 square kilometers
of land, which has been or is being isolated between the Green Line
Israel’s border with the West Bank and the wall. These 11 communities
cultivate about 138 square kilometers, or 57 percent of this land, mostly
with olive trees and field crops. It is likely that with the wall’s
construction most, if not all, of this land will be, or has already been,
severed from the communities.
The Israeli Defense Ministry claims that there are 41 gates allowing
Palestinians access to their lands. Right now, only landowners are permitted
to pass through these gates, while farmers must apply for permits, which are
extremely difficult to obtain. Palestinian sources say that the number of
gates that are actually open is around six while the United Nations reports
passage through only 14. Because accessibility is unclear, seemingly
arbitrary, and ultimately dependent on the security situation, more and more
Palestinians sometimes entire families are camping on their land,
returning to their villages only once a week.
Furthermore, the weaving path of the wall, which deviates several kilometers
into the West Bank at some points, has placed almost 123 square kilometers
of Arab land on the Israeli side, representing a loss to Palestinians of 2
percent of the West Bank thus far. The World Bank has estimated that when
completed, the wall could annex 10 percent of the West Bank. However, a
report released by Amnesty International on Sept. 7, 2003, concluded that
with the wall’s completion, some 45-55 percent of the West Bank would be
annexed to Israel, together with 98 percent of Israeli settlements. In
addition, approximately 440,000 Palestinians would be enclosed on the
“Israeli” side of the wall, cut off from their lands, their families and
from other Palestinian communities.
On Aug. 21, no doubt in response to the suicide bombing in Jerusalem, Israel
destroyed the entire commercial market of Nazlat Issa in one day. This was
done in order to build an “isolation barrier,” which is an extension of the
wall designed to entrap and completely isolate the community and its
surrounding areas. Over 100 shops and five homes were demolished,
representing the single largest demolition of buildings in years. The Nazlat
Issa market, which was previously targeted in January 2003 (when it lost
almost half of its shops), was the commercial center for the entire region.
Israel has defended the wall as a necessary security measure, arguing that
formidable concrete barriers will stop future suicide bombings, rather than
trigger them. The Bush administration concurs in principle, if not in fact.
For a large and growing number of Palestinians the choice is a stark and
increasingly untenable one: a home without a livelihood, or a livelihood
without a home.
Which would you choose?
Sara Roy is a research scholar at the Center for
Middle Eastern Studies, Harvard University, and author of The Gaza Strip:
The Political Economy of De-Development. She wrote this commentary for THE
DAILY STAR
|
|
 |
| Earth, a planet
hungry for peace |
 |
| The Israeli
apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers
(Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03). |
|
 |
| The Israeli
apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in
the West Bank (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03). |
|
|