Abir Dandis, the mother of the two girls who were murdered in the Negev town of Al-Fura’a last week, couldn't find a police officer to listen to her warnings, neither in Arad nor in Ma’ale Adumim. Both police stations operate in areas where Israel wants to gather the Bedouin into permanent communities, against their will, in order to clear more land for Jewish communities. The dismissive treatment Dandis received shows how the Bedouin are considered simply to be lawbreakers by their very nature. But as a resident of the West Bank asking for help for her daughters, whose father was Israeli, Dandis faced the legal-bureaucratic maze created by the Oslo Accords.

The Palestinian police is not allowed to arrest Israeli civilians. It must hand suspects over to the Israel Police. The Palestinian police complain that in cases of Israelis suspected of committing crimes against Palestinian residents, the Israel Police tend not to investigate or prosecute them.

In addition, the town of Al-Azaria, where Dandis lives, is in Area B, under Palestinian civilian authority and Israeli security authority. According to the testimony of Palestinian residents, neither the IDF nor the Israel Police has any interest in internal Palestinian crime even though they have both the authority and the obligation to act in Area B.

The Palestinian police are limited in what it can do in Area B. Bringing in reinforcements or carrying weapons in emergency situations requires coordination with, and obtaining permission from, the IDF. If Dandis fears that the man who murdered her daughters is going to attack her as well, she has plenty of reason to fear that she will not receive appropriate, immediate police protection from either the Israelis or the Palestinians.

Dandis told Jack Khoury of Haaretz that the Ma’ale Adumim police referred her to the Palestinian Civil Affairs Coordination and Liaison Committee. Theoretically, this committee (which is subordinate to the Civil Affairs Ministry) is the logical place to go for such matters. Its parallel agency in Israel is the Civilian Liaison Committee (which is part of the Coordination and Liaison Administration - a part of the Civil Administration under the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories).

In their meetings, they are supposed to discuss matters such as settlers’ complaints about the high volume of the loudspeakers at mosques or Palestinians’ complaints about attacks by settlers. But the Palestinians see the Liaison Committee as a place to submit requests for permission to travel to Israel, and get the impression that its clerks do not have much power when faced with their Israeli counterparts. In any case, the coordination process is cumbersome and long.

The Palestinian police has a family welfare unit, and activists in Palestinian women’s organizations say that in recent years, its performance has improved. But, as stated, it has no authority over Israeli civilians and residents. Several non-governmental women’s groups also operate in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem, and women in similar situations approach them for help. The manager of one such organization told Haaretz that Dandis also fell victim to this confusing duplication of procedures and laws. Had Dandis approached her, she said, she would have referred her to Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, which has expertise in navigating Israel’s laws and authorities.

John Kerry revealed his long-awaited plan for peace in the Middle East on Sunday, hinging on a $4bn (£2.6bn) investment in the Palestinian private sector.

The US secretary of state, speaking at the World Economic Forum on the Jordanian shores of the Dead Sea, told an audience including Israeli president Shimon Peres and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas that an independent Palestinian economy is essential to achieving a sustainable peace.

Speaking under the conference banner "Breaking the Impasse", Kerry announced a plan that he promised would be "bigger, bolder and more ambitious" than anything since the Oslo accords, more than 20 years ago.

Tony Blair is to lead a group of private sector leaders in devising a plan to release the Palestinian economy from its dependence on international donors. The initial findings of Blair's taskforce, Kerry boasted, were "stunning", predicting a 50% increase in Palestinian GDP over three years, a cut of two-thirds in unemployment rates and almost double the Palestinian median wage. Currently, 40% of the Palestinian economy is supplied by donor aid.

Kerry assured Abbas that the economic plan was not a substitute for a political solution, which remains the US's "top priority".

Peres, who had taken the stage just minutes before, also issued a personal plea to his Palestinian counterpart to return to the negotiations.

"Let me say to my dear friend President Abbas," Peres said, "Should we really dance around the table? Lets sit together. You'll be surprised how much can be achieved in open, direct and organised meetings."

Thick locks hug the front gates of shuttered shops, now covered in graffiti and dust from lack of use. Only a handful of customers pass along the dimly lit road, sometimes stopping to check the ripeness of fruits and vegetables, or ordering meat in near-empty butcher shops.

“All the shops are closed. I’m the only one open. This used to be the best place,” said 64-year-old Mustafa Sunocret, selling vegetables out of a small storefront in the marketplace near his family’s home in the Muslim quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City.

Amidst the brightly coloured scarves, clothes and carpets, ceramic pottery and religious souvenirs filling the shops of Jerusalem’s historic Old City, Palestinian merchants are struggling to keep their businesses alive.

Faced with worsening health problems, Sunocret told IPS that he cannot work outside of the Old City, even as the cost of maintaining his shop, with high electricity, water and municipal tax bills to pay, weighs on him.

“I only have this shop,” he said. “There is no other work. I’m tired.”

Abed Ajloni, the owner of an antiques shop in the Old City, owes the Jerusalem municipality 250,000 Israeli shekels (68,300 U.S. dollars) in taxes. He told IPS that almost every day, the city’s tax collectors come into the Old City, accompanied by Israeli police and soldiers, to pressure people there to pay.

“It feels like they’re coming again to occupy the city, with the soldiers and police,” Ajloni, who has owned the same shop for 35 years, told IPS. “But where can I go? What can I do? All my life I was in this place.”

He added, “Does Jerusalem belong to us, or to someone else? Who’s responsible for Jerusalem? Who?”

Illegal annexation

Israel occupied East Jerusalem, including the Old City, in 1967. In July 1980, it passed a law stating that “Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel”. But Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem and subsequent application of Israeli laws over the entire city remain unrecognised by the international community.

Under international law, East Jerusalem is considered occupied territory – along with the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Syrian Golan Heights – and Palestinian residents of the city are protected under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

Jerusalem has historically been the economic, political and cultural centre of life for the entire Palestinian population. But after decades languishing under destructive Israeli policies meant to isolate the city from the rest of the Occupied Territories and a lack of municipal services and investment, East Jerusalem has slipped into a state of poverty and neglect.

“After some 45 years of occupation, Arab Jerusalemites suffer from political and cultural schizophrenia, simultaneously connected with and isolated from their two hinterlands: Ramallah and the West Bank to their east, West Jerusalem and Israel to the west,” the International Crisis Group recently wrote.

Israeli restrictions on planning and building, home demolitions, lack of investment in education and jobs, construction of an eight-foot-high separation barrier between and around Palestinian neighbourhoods and the creation of a permit system to enter Jerusalem have all contributed to the city’s isolation.

Formal Palestinian political groups have also been banned from the city, and between 2001-2009, Israel closed an estimated 26 organisations, including the former Palestinian Liberation Organisation headquarters in Jerusalem, the Orient House and the Jerusalem Chamber of Commerce.

Extreme poverty

Israel’s policies have also led to higher prices for basic goods and services and forced many Palestinian business owners to close shop and move to Ramallah or other Palestinian neighbourhoods on the other side of the wall. Many Palestinian Jerusalemites also prefer to do their shopping in the West Bank, or in West Jerusalem, where prices are lower.

While Palestinians constitute 39 percent of the city’s population today, almost 80 percent of East Jerusalem residents, including 85 percent of children, live below the poverty line.

“How could you develop [an] economy if you don’t control your resources? How could you develop [an] economy if you don’t have any control of your borders?” said Zakaria Odeh, director of the Civic Coalition for Palestinian Rights in Jerusalem, of “this kind of fragmentation, checkpoints, closure”.

“Without freedom of movement of goods and human beings, how could you develop an economy?” he asked.

“You can’t talk about independent economy in Jerusalem or the West Bank or in all of Palestine without a political solution. We don’t have a Palestinian economy; we have economic activities. That’s all we have,” Odeh told IPS.

Israel’s separation barrier alone, according to a new report by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTD), has caused a direct loss of over one billion dollars to Palestinians in Jerusalem, and continues to incur 200 million dollars per year in lost opportunities.

Israel’s severing and control over the Jerusalem-Jericho road – the historical trade route that connected Jerusalem to the rest of the West Bank and Middle East – has also contributed to the city’s economic downturn.

Separation of Jerusalem from West Bank

Before the First Intifada (Arabic for “uprising”) began in the late 1980s, East Jerusalem contributed approximately 14 to 15 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in the Occupied Palestinian territories (OPT). By 2000, that number had dropped to less than eight percent; in 2010, the East Jerusalem economy, compared to the rest of the OPT, was estimated at only seven percent.

“Economic separation resulted in the contraction in the relative size of the East Jerusalem economy, its detachment from the remaining OPT and the gradual redirection of East Jerusalem employment towards the Israeli labour market,” the U.N. report found.

Decades ago, Israel adopted a policy to maintain a so-called “demographic balance” in Jerusalem and attempt to limit Palestinian residents of the city to 26.5 percent or less of the total population.

To maintain this composition, Israel built numerous Jewish-Israeli settlements inside and in a ring around Jerusalem and changed the municipal boundaries to encompass Jewish neighbourhoods while excluding Palestinian ones.

It is now estimated that 90,000 Palestinians holding Jerusalem residency rights live on the other side of the separation barrier and must cross through Israeli checkpoints in order to reach Jerusalem for school, medical treatment, work, and other services.

“Israel is using all kinds of tools to push the Palestinians to leave; sometimes they are visible, and sometimes invisible tools,” explained Ziad al-Hammouri, director of the Jerusalem Centre for Social and Economic Rights (JCSER).

Al-Hammouri told IPS that at least 25 percent of the 1,000 Palestinian shops in the Old City were closed in recent years as a result of high municipal taxes and a lack of customers. “Taxation is an invisible tool…as dangerous as revoking ID cards and demolishing houses,” he said. “Israel will use this as pressure and as a tool in the future to confiscate these shops and properties.”

Many critics are perfectly content to be proven right when their critique of current affairs meets their low expectations. For such critics, being right demonstrates that their criticism and knowledge of political events are sound and well placed. But, for Palestinian critics, there is little joy in being proven right because it means that the political situation is just as grim as predicted.

Such is the case with the much-hyped “row” between Israel and the United States back in March following the announcement that Israel would build 1,600 new housing units in the colony of Ramat Shlomo. While much was made of US President Barack Obama’s subsequent shunning of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House during their last meeting – including the unspeakable decision not to hold a joint press conference or even allow photographers to capture the meeting – critics properly noted that there was much ado about nothing. Alas, the critics were correct.

The latest, cordial, meeting between Netanyahu and Obama a few weeks ago came as little surprise. Palestinians have grown accustomed to seeing Israeli leaders warmly received in the White House, irrespective of the crimes perpetrated by Israel against Palestinians. Broad smiles have always greeted Israeli officials, even when Israel’s insatiable appetite for Palestinian land flies in the face of international demands for a freeze on settlement activity. Indeed, the White House always reminds us of the “unshakeable bond” between Israel and the United States even as Palestinian homes continue to be demolished.

But what many had not expected was the over-the-top nature of the reception Obama afforded Netanyahu in the face of Israel’s actions toward US citizens. Perhaps Obama forgot that just a month earlier Israel carried out a brutal raid on a Gaza-bound humanitarian aid flotilla attempting to break the illegal Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip. Perhaps he forgot that a young American citizen was killed, execution-style, on board the lead ship, with one bullet to the chest and four, at close range, to the head. Perhaps he missed that the next day another young American, Emily Henochowicz, had her eye shot out by an Israeli-fired tear gas canister as she peacefully protested the flotilla raid. Perhaps he also forgot that, days later, a Palestinian man married to an American woman was executed after what appears to have been a traffic accident at an Israeli checkpoint.

Obama did not demand accountability for these acts of violence. Instead, he greeted Netanyahu with the usual broad smile, strong handshake and warm words that every US president has offered every Israeli leader, irrespective of Israel’s actions. The message: Israel will never be held accountable for its actions, whether toward Palestinians or toward any individual trying to protect Palestinians.

Some pundits may pontificate that this is merely a change in tactics on the part of Obama, that he is moving from the “stick” to the “carrot” in the hope that Israel will see the error of its ways, change course and become a law-abiding actor. But on this, the pundits and Obama should take some lessons from the Palestinian Authority, which has spent the last 17 years offering carrots to successive Israeli administrations (from changing the discourse to focus on Israeli security rather than Palestinian freedom to actually serving as Israel’s security subcontractor) in the mistaken belief that somehow if we Palestinians offer enough carrots to Israel, its appetite for Palestinian land will be sated. For all these carrots, Palestinians have achieved nothing and instead a fatter, more emboldened “rabbit” has emerged demanding even more concessions from the Palestinian people.

The pundits will argue that the carrots are working and will point to Netanyahu’s recent statements in which he indicated that he is willing to take “bold steps” for an undefined, conditional “peace” and even pressed for direct rather than indirect talks with the PLO. But the pundits will ignore reality: the peace process has only ever served to provide Israel with legitimacy while masking its ongoing violations of human rights. From 1993 to 2000, for example, as the world greeted the peace process with great fanfare and 34 countries established diplomatic ties with Israel, it carried out the largest expansion of the settlement enterprise in its history, including a doubling of its settler population as well as one of the largest revocations of residency rights of Palestinian Jerusalemites. In short, while the world focused on handshakes, Israel continued to carry out its policies of replacing one people with another. And on this path, Israel will continue.

Indeed, for all of his talk of “peace,” Netanyahu has also indicated that he will not halt settlement activity and home demolitions will continue as planned. The blockade will continue and Palestinians will continue to be imprisoned in large Bantustans. In short, Israel continues to act as it always has, unless it sees a stick. And the time for sticks is now.

But the US is too afraid to use its annual $3 billion in assistance to Israel as a stick. Instead, it will continue to turn a blind eye to Israel’s colonization while promising an increasingly compliant and complacent Palestinian leadership that, for domestic reasons, the Palestinians will have to wait until mid-term elections, or maybe second-term elections before the stick will be used against Israel.

All the while, Palestinian critics will continue to watch the handshakes and smiles, with that sickening feeling that we know we are right but wish we were wrong.

Diana Buttu is a human rights lawyer and a former legal adviser to the Palestinian negotiating team. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons.org, an online newsletter.

Palestinian comedy show, comedian Imad Farajin courts a young European, asking for her hand in marriage. Espousing the benefits of marrying a Palestinian, Farajin jokes, “We now have ‘indirect talks’ for four months and in just four months’ time, we will have a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital, no checkpoints and the refugees will all return. The Palestinian passport will be worth a lot.”

Farajin’s words are greeted in the same way as the statements uttered by the Americans, the Quartet and other members of the international community: with laughter. The latest “row” between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu regime is no different to Palestinians.

Undoubtedly, Israeli Interior Minister Eli Yishai’s announcement – during US Vice President Joseph Biden’s visit to Israel – of plans to build 1,600 units in an East Jerusalem colony was meant to embarrass Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (for reasons of coalition politics) and, more importantly, send a message to the United States that, despite any “indirect talks” or otherwise with the Palestinian Liberation Organization, Israel’s colonization will continue. The announcement was condemned by Biden and mainstream media rushed to affirm the so-called “strain” in US-Israel relations with some proclaiming that the “sky is falling.”

But the sky is not falling. Rather, we are witnessing a repeat of history – and sadly with a familiar outcome. As far back as the George H. W. Bush administration, official US visits were almost always greeted with an Israeli announcement of colony expansion or creation, as then Secretary of State James Baker lamented. These announcements have continued until now so it was hardly surprising that the announcement of the Ramat Shlomo expansion came during Biden’s visit.

While the US “condemned” the announcement – in part to boost the position of “friendly” Arab regimes that pushed for “indirect talks” between the PLO and Israel – it has quickly become clear that that condemnation was aimed at the timing of the announcement rather than its substance. Indeed, the statement subsequently issued by Netanyahu’s office offered a polite apology to Biden, indicating that the plans for the further colonization of East Jerusalem should have been announced at a different time. To drive home the point, Netanyahu later made sure to say that construction in East Jerusalem was no different than construction in Tel Aviv and confirmed that, like all Israeli prime ministers over the past 42 years, he would continue to colonize East Jerusalem.

With Netanyahu’s position firmly stated, the Obama administration appears to have followed the path of its predecessors: it backed down in the face of Israeli intransigence. President Barack Obama met with Netanyahu yesterday at the White House, and with that meeting it was again business as usual in US-Israel relations, “harsh” statements aside.

Palestinians have long learned the lesson that actions speak louder than words. No amount of “strong” messages from the Obama administration will convince Palestinians that the United States will put an end to Israel’s decades-long violations of human rights. Only actions will. And if previous action is an indicator of future behavior, and considering the “special bond” with Israel (backed by billions of dollars of US taxpayers’ money), Washington will show that it is either unwilling or unable to ensure that Israel ends its violations of international law.

Netanyahu may have pacified the US with his proclamation that the colony expansion announced will not take place for another two years, in the same way that he pacified President Bill Clinton a decade ago when he announced the expansion of the colony of Har Homa. At that time, President Yasser Arafat and Palestinian negotiators threatened to end negotiations with Israel if the Har Homa decision was not reversed. American officials instead cajoled Arafat with the argument that, “You can’t ask us to pressure Israel now. Final-status negotiations are about to take place!” A few short months later, with the start of the intifada, Palestinians once again demanded a freeze in colony construction. The response? “You can’t ask us to pressure Israel now that there is violence.”

Sure enough, with a little pressure from the Clinton administration, the PLO resumed negotiations with Israel despite the continued colony expansion in the erroneous belief that Israel’s colonization would magically be reversed by negotiations. Despite its statements to the contrary, the PLO will likely resume “indirect talks” with Israel this time as well following pressure from the Obama administration (and largely because it has failed to develop any strategy other than negotiations).

Just like any fable, there is always a moral. This one appears to be that we can always hope that the past does not repeat itself. What we do know for sure, importantly for fans of Imad Farajin, is that we can be guaranteed plenty of political satire for years to come.

Diana Buttu is a human rights lawyer and a former legal advisor to the Palestinian negotiating team. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons.org, an online newsletter.

Although the colonization of the Gaza Strip has now to an end (with the evacuation of the settlers), Israel’s military occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) continues. Israel strictly controls all access in and out of the Occupied Gaza Strip thereby controlling the movement of both goods and people. And, while the Israeli Army may soon evacuate the Gaza Strip, the Army will continue to strictly control all Palestinian movement. Below is an update on the status of coordination with Israel.

Rafah Crossing Point

Background: The Rafah crossing point is the only Palestinian access point into Egypt. Although the crossing point is situated more than 6 kilometers away from the border with Israel, Israel maintains complete control over Palestinian movement (both people and goods) at this and every other entry and exit point. Under Israeli orders, an estimated 700 Palestinians per day are allowed to leave the Gaza Strip (to Egypt) and the vast majority of Palestinians in Gaza are denied the ability to travel. (An estimated 90 percent of Palestinians in Gaza are routinely denied the ability to travel and Israel currently imposes travel restrictions on Palestinian males aged 16 to 35).

While Israel claims that it is “disengaging” from the Occupied Gaza Strip, it wishes to continue to control the movement of Palestinians in and out of the Occupied Gaza Strip, while removing its presence from the Rafah crossing point and the Philadelphi belt. Accordingly, Israel seeks to move the Rafah crossing point to Kerem Shalom – inside Israel located at the southeast corner of the Gaza Strip, bordering both Egypt and Israel – where it can control all Palestinian movement.

Palestinian Position: Palestinians should be granted complete freedom of movement, without interference by Israel. Accordingly, Palestinians are opposed to the movement of the crossing point to Kerem Shalom as this only serves to cement Israeli control over Palestinians. If Israel truly seeks to “disengage” from the Gaza Strip, it should cease its control over the Occupied Gaza Strip.

Status: Israel continues to insist on the movement of the crossing point to Kerem Shalom despite Palestinian and Egyptian objections to the contrary.

Customs Envelope

Background: The Palestinian Authority and Israel currently maintain a customs arrangement regulating the movement of goods. The Paris Protocol, signed in 1994 and ratified in 1995, created one “customs envelope” in Israel and Occupied Palestinian Territory (“OPT”), whereby goods entering into the envelope are taxed only once and goods within the envelope are not taxed. For example, goods entering the Gaza Strip from Egypt are taxed upon entry but if transported to Israel or to the West Bank are not taxed again. The Paris Protocol also specified which goods could be imported into OPT. Owing to Israel’s control over all border crossings, Israel has maintained control over the Palestinian economy: Palestinian goods are often detained for weeks or months at Israeli crossing points and Israel denies the free import of goods (including those included in the Paris Protocol). Furthermore, Palestinian businesspeople have often resorted to using Israeli intermediaries to import and export goods. Accordingly, tariffs that would normally go to the Palestinian Authority go to Israel via the Israeli intermediary. Nonetheless, the Palestinian economy can immediately benefit from the Protocol’s proper implementation: if Palestinian goods are allowed to move freely and if the Palestinian Authority receives the tariffs that are withheld by Israel international trade could be improved.

Israel wants to move the crossing point to Kerem Shalom. It wants to maintain Israeli customs officers there to ensure that only specified goods are imported into Gaza and thereby control the Palestinian economy. Otherwise, it has threatened to cancel the customs envelope.

Palestinian Position: The movement of the Rafah crossing point to Kerem Shalom will ensure Gaza’s continued dependence on Israel, as Israel would continue to control Gaza’s access to and from Egypt and also continue economic control over the area. Furthermore, the movement of the border crossing to Kerem Shalom is not logical: if Israeli customs officials are present in Kerem Shalom, it casts doubt on Israel’s claim that it will allow the Palestinians to freely operate a seaport, for Israeli official will also need to be present at the seaport, situated well within OPT. Therefore, if Israel wishes to maintain the customs union, it welcomes a third party to ensure smooth functioning and transfer of the Rafah crossing point to Palestinian control post evacuation and to monitor customs arrangements. This move would represent an important step towards Gaza’s successful economic recovery following 38 years of Israeli de-development. For more information on the Gazan economy see: Sara Roy, The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development (1995)

Status: Israel has not yet agreed to the presence of a third party to monitor customs and continues to insist on the movement of the crossing point to Kerem Shalom.

Palestinian Airport

Background: The Palestinian International Airport was opened in 1998 by Presidents Clinton and Arafat and serviced Palestinians seeking to fly in and out of the Occupied Gaza Strip. The airport operated under the strict control of Israel. In 2000, the Israeli Army closed the airport and several months later destroyed the runway and control tower, with estimated damages exceeding more than USD $8 million. It has remained closed.

Palestinian Position: The Palestinian Authority seeks to rebuild the airport immediately at an estimated cost of USD $26 million. Following the evacuation of the Israeli Army, the Palestinian Authority seeks to open the airport.

Status: Israel has indicated that it will allow the Palestinian Authority to rebuild the airport after its evacuation but it has not yet provided answers as to whether it will allow the Palestinian Authority to operate the airport following the evacuation. Under the terms of the “Disengagement Plan” Israel will retain complete control over Palestinian airspace.

Movement of Goods within the OPT and between the OPT and Israel

Background: Currently, Israel exercises complete control over the Palestinian economy by controlling the movement of Palestinians and their goods. In the Occupied West Bank, for example, Israel maintains hundreds of checkpoints and barriers designed to fragment Palestinian communities. Palestinian goods are subject to a “back-to-back” system of movement, wherein Palestinian goods are unloaded and reloaded onto different trucks several times before reaching their final destination. For example, goods originating from Hebron (in the Occupied West Bank) destined for Nablus (also in the Occupied West Bank) must be unloaded and reloaded an estimated seven times. Obviously this increases transportation costs and the time for which goods reach their destination.

Furthermore, Israel does not maintain systematized rules or procedures for the movement of Palestinian goods, thereby increasing risk and uncertainty among investors. In the Karni terminal (the sole terminal for the movement of Palestinian goods from the Occupied Gaza Strip), rules for the movement of goods are frequently changed by the Israelis. Today, a mere 50 trucks per day of Palestinian goods are allowed to leave the terminal, owing to the onerous and unpredictable searches. Israeli goods, which do not have to go through any security procedures, are shipped in daily on more than 300 trucks. Accordingly, Israeli goods are often less expensive to Palestinians and therefore the Palestinians remain a captive market to the Palestinians.

Palestinian Position: Israel can easily improve the economy by simply removing its barriers and checkpoints and by allowing Palestinian goods to move based on international principles of “door-to-door” wherein Palestinian goods are freely allowed to move without onerous security searches that are not imposed on Israeli goods. By creating certainty among investors, the economy of the Gaza Strip can be revitalized and improved. The World Bank is in agreement with this conclusion: “Palestinian economic recovery depends on a radical easing of internal closures throughout the West Bank [and Gaza] the opening of Palestinian external borders to commodity trade, and sustaining a reasonable flow of Palestinian labor into Israel.” See Disengagement, The Palestinian Economy and the Settlements”, the World Bank, June 15, 2004.

Status: Israeli Minister of Defense, Mofaz, agreed on the “door-to-door” system of movement of goods in the presence of Quartet Special Envoy James Wolfensohn but in later technical discussion expressed that it is impossible to implement as Israel has put forward such high security specifications for any scanner that would be used at crossing points – so high that not a single scanner in the world exists that meets these specifications. International experts do not support the Israeli position.

Seaport

Background: In 1999, in the Sharm el-Sheikh Agreement between the PLO and Israel, it was agreed that a seaport would be opened in Gaza for exclusive Palestinian use. In July 2000, construction began on the seaport but this construction was unilaterally halted by Israel in October 2000, as Israel refused to facilitate the movement of needed construction materials. The seaport will take an estimated 2 years to build. Under the terms of the “Disengagement Plan” Israel will continue to control Palestinian territorial waters.

Palestinian Position: The Palestinian Authority seeks to build and operate the seaport in order to improve the Palestinian economy and reduce reliance upon Israel’s ports.

Status: While Israel has agreed to the construction of the seaport, it has not yet provided details as to how it will facilitate the construction of the port, as the materials need to be brought into the Gaza Strip from the West Bank and elsewhere. Israel has also failed to sign a letter to the donor community indicating that it is willing to facilitate the construction of the airport. This letter is needed in order to secure donor funds to assist in the construction of the seaport.

Safe Passage and Freedom of Movement

Background: Currently, Palestinians require Israeli permits to travel: (1) within the Occupied West Bank; (2) between the Occupied West Bank and the Occupied Gaza Strip and (3) to Israel. Palestinians in the Gaza Strip also require Israeli permission to cross international boundaries to visit other countries. Such permits are granted rarely (less than 30 percent of the Palestinian population receives such permits) and in the Occupied Gaza Strip, approximately 90 percent of the Palestinian population are denied the ability to travel.

Under the Oslo Agreements, Israel was supposed to have instituted a “safe passage” between the Occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip to ensure freedom of movement for Palestinians within Occupied Palestinian Territory. Passage through the “safe passage” remained subject to strict Israeli control and in 2000 Israel closed the safe passage route thereby isolating the Occupied Gaza Strip from the rest of Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Palestinian Position: In order to ensure that Palestinians are not enclosed in a large prison, freedom of movement must be guaranteed. Yet, while Israel asserts that it wants to “disengage” from the Occupied Gaza Strip, it wants to retain control over Palestinians (and hence their economy) by denying freedom of movement. Israel also seeks to ensure that the Gaza Strip is cut off from the rest of Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Status: Israel has yet to respond to whether freedom of movement for Palestinians will be guaranteed: whether Palestinians will be able to travel to the rest of Occupied Palestinian Territory; whether Palestinians will continue to require Israeli permission to leave the Gaza Strip and whether Palestinians will be able to freely travel throughout the Occupied West Bank. While many discussions have taken place on the mode for transportation (sunken road, railroad, convoy), these discussions remain inconclusive.

Status of Area to be Evacuated

Background: Under the Oslo Agreements, Israel divided the Occupied West Bank into three areas:

• Area A – This area consists of approximately 17.2% of the Occupied West Bank, divided into 13 separate, non-contiguous areas. The Palestinian Authority has responsibility for internal security and has wide civil powers.
• Area B – The area consists of 23.8% of the West Bank. The Palestinian Authority has civil control over the area, but overall security control rests with Israel. For all practical purposes, since September 2000, Area B has functionally ceased to exist and has been under full Israeli control.
• Area C – This area consists of 59% of the Occupied West Bank. Israel has full security and civil responsibility over these areas. This is the only contiguous area in the Occupied West Bank; it surrounds and divides Areas A and B. This area is primarily situated around the Israeli colonies of the West Bank. The colonies themselves are not subject to the classification of Area A, B or C.

Palestinian Position: Given that Israel has dismantled four colonies in the Occupied West Bank, there, the evacuated areas surrounding the colonies should become “Area A” and therefore fall within the complete control of the Palestinian Authority.

Status: Israel wants keep the area under full Israeli control – “Area C” and will only allow access to the area with “coordination.” Accordingly, the Israeli Army will remain present in the area, thereby denying Palestinians freedom of movement in the area. In other words, Israel will maintain complete control over the area.

For additional information, please contact:
Diana Buttu +972-599-604-657

In approximately a week Israel will evacuate its colonies from the Occupied Gaza Strip and four isolated colonies in the Occupied West Bank. This report serves to provide an update on the Israel's coordination with the Palestinian Authority. As can be seen, Israel has yet to provide answers and information to the Palestinians on all of the major issues. Accordingly, Palestinians fear that the Occupied Gaza Strip will be turned into a large prison, with no access to the Occupied West Bank or the rest of the world.

To View The Full Factsheet As PDF File (55)KB