The shocking human cost that occupation has taken on Palestinian women is laid bare in research published today. Combining research, extensive surveys, and first-hand testimonies from over 40 Palestinian women, Palestinian Women: The Disproportionate Impact of The Israeli Occupation provides new insight into the gendered experience of occupation, looking into four issues in particular:

• women refugees
• the impact of residency revocation on Palestinian women in Jerusalem
• the experience of women prisoners
• Gazans’ access to health

Co-authored by four Palestinian NGOs – the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH), Palestinian Working Woman Society for Development (PWWSD), the Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling (WCLAC), and Women Media and Development (TAM), the report includes detailed findings that demonstrate how the oppression occupation has permeated women’s daily lives, and the particular impact is has had on women in Palestinian refugee camps, Palestinian women living in Jerusalem, women prisoners, and residents of Gaza who require health services.

The impact on refugee women

Researchers spoke to 500 Palestinian refugee women from 12 Palestinian camps (7 in the West Bank, 5 in Gaza). Their findings included the following:

• A third of women surveyed had been directly exposed to physical assault by Israeli Occupation Forces. 9% had been exposed to threats of being attacked by police dogs during Israeli night raids on their homes.
• Over a third (37%) of respondents had been exposed to detention or interrogation, while 38% said that they or members of their households had been exposed to verbal abuse during Israeli army raids, at checkpoints or while visiting religious places.
• Nearly a quarter (24%) were forced to live in shelters or with extended family. 22% were forced to live under unhealthy conditions. 13% stated that the female and male members of their families were separated as a result of having to live in shelters.
• More than one in five (21%) had been exposed to beatings or tear gas at Israeli checkpoints while they were pregnant. 4% reported that they aborted or gave birth at Israeli checkpoints.
• The majority (64%- 321 cases) had been unable to visit religious or recreational places because of Occupation restrictions.

Jerusalem: Residency Revocation and Family Reunification

According to official figures, 14,595 Palestinians from East Jerusalem had their residency status revoked between 1967 and the end of 2016.

Through residency revocations, Israel has separated husbands from wives, parents from children, and extended families from one another, causing traumatic complications for women attempting to remain with their families in both Jerusalem and the West Bank.

This leads to traumatic fears of separation from children for mothers and an entrenching of patriarchal practices across society. Palestinian women living in Jerusalem lose residency rights if they get divorced or their husbands remarry. Limiting their access to justice, female victims of domestic violence fear reporting abuse to authorities in case they are forcibly transferred away from their children.

Women prisoners

Since the beginning of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine in 1967, approximately 10,000 Palestinian women have been arrested and detained by Israeli military forces. According to the Commission of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs’ 2017 annual report, 1,467 children were arrested last year.

Our researchers spoke to prisoners who experienced physical and psychological torture at arrest and imprisonment, and traumatic, gendered treatment, including:

• Women denied access to menstrual products while detained
• A woman arrested while pregnant who gave birth while chained to a prison hospital bed
• Ex-prisoners who report being subjected to rape and death threats during interrogation, including a girl in of 15-years old threatened with rape
• Women who were subjected to frequent forced and violent strip searches
• A prisoner who reported toothache, only to have the wrong tooth removed

Access to Health in Gaza

Israel exercises strict control Gaza’s borders, a policy of ‘actual authority’, constituting continued occupation, despite the withdrawal of its permanent presence. This control in particular affects those who need medical treatment outside of Gaza’s struggling health system, who require permission to leave. The report shows that the rate of approval applications is falling year-by-year:

• 92.5% of applications were successful in 2012
• 88.7% in 2013
• 82.4% in 2014
• 77.5% in 2015
• 62.1% in 2016

Of the 26,282 permit applications submitted by patients aiming to exit through Erez in 2016, 8,242 (31.4%) were delayed. Many applicants received no response from border authorities, even after lawyers filed formal applications on their behalf. These delays regularly extend months and years beyond medical appointments, worsening already life-threatening diseases and in some cases resulting in death.

Read the full report here, or download it here:

Palestinian Women – The Disproportionate Impact of the Israeli Occupation

Women represent half of the Palestinian population

The qualitative base of the structure of the population in Palestine the sex ratio stood at 103.3, which means that there are 103 males for every 100 females

The percentage of female-headed households

The percentage of female-headed households in Palestine was 10.6% in 2017, 11.2% in the West Bank and 9.5% in Gaza Strip.

fifth of the persons in Palestine got married at an early age (less than 18 years) in 2016

Early marriage reached to 20.5% among females and 1.0% among males of the total married population in Palestine; the rate was 19.9% out of the total married population in West Bank and 21.6% out of the total married population in Gaza Strip end 2016.

The highest rate of female early marriage in the West Bank was in Hebron 36.8%, and the lowest was in Jericho and the Jordan Valley 1.2% out of the total number of women marriage below 18 years in the West Bank. In Gaza Strip, the highest rate of early female marriage was 42.1% in Gaza Governorate, while the lowest rate was in Dier Al-Balah 7.1% out of the total number of women marriage below 18 years in Gaza Strip.

A continued rise in literacy among women

Despite the rise in literacy rates among females over the last decade, the gap is still in favor of males by 3.0%, female literacy rates was 95.6% compared to 98.6% for male literacy in the year 2017.

Rise in enrollment rate of females in high schools compared to males

Data showed that male enrollment in high schools was 60.5%, compared to female enrollment which was 80.4% for the year 2016-2017.

A gap in the participation rate and average daily wages between men and women

The female participation rate in the labor force was 19.0% of the total female population at work age in 2017, compared to 10.3% in 2001, while the male participation rate was 71.2% in 2017. There was also a pay gap in the average daily wages between males and females; the average daily wage for females was NIS 84.6 compared to NIS 119.6 for males.

Around half of the women are unemployed

The unemployment rate among women participated in the labor force was 47.4% compared to 22.3% for participated males. 65.8% of youth females aged of (15-29 years) were unemployed. While the unemployment rate among women with 13 school years and above represents 53.8% of women in this group.

Palestinian Women in Public Life

In 2017; 21.2% of the members of the local councils are females in the West Bank while 78.8% were males.

In 2016, 82.7% of judges were male, compared to 17.3% female, while 66.6% of registered lawyers were male, compared to 33.4% female and 82.0% of members of the public prosecution staff were male, compared to 18.0% female. Furthermore, Palestinian female ambassadors represented 5.8% compared to 94.2% male. Females represented 32.3% of registered engineers with the Union of Engineers while male represented 67.7%. On the other hand, in 2016, 12.4% of members of student councils in West Bank universities were females, compared to 87.6% males.

In the public sector, females represented 42.7% of civil servants, compared to 57.3% male civil servant. In the public civil sector, female Director Generals represented 11.3% of the total director generals, compared to 88.7% males in the same post.

To View this Report as PDF

To View the Full Statestics as PDF

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