Israel’s “Disengagement” Plan (even as revised on May 30, 2004) repeats the mistakes of the Oslo Accords: Israel redeploys from heavily populated Palestinian areas while still maintaining military and economic control over those areas. At the same time, Israel expands colonies and infrastructure in other parts of Occupied Palestinian Territory in order to prejudice final status negotiations. Under the Plan:

Illegal Israeli Colonies to be Evacuated: Israel claims that it will eventually evacuate all illegal colonies in the Occupied Gaza Strip. The total settler population of the Occupied Gaza Strip is approximately 7,3001 (only 0.5% of the Gaza population) although 17 Israeli colonies, related roads and military installations control approximately 15% of the Strip.2 In exchange for partially complying with its obligations under international law in the Occupied Gaza Strip, Israel expects to retain larger colony blocs in the Occupied West Bank.

Israel has stated that it intends to evacuate the Gaza colonies in four stages, but there is no guarantee that a complete evacuation will take place. This staggered four-phase approach is similar to the failed Oslo approach: “temporary” interim phases become long-term realities as Israel “evacuates” from some densely populated Palestinian areas while simultaneously expanding colonies throughout the rest of Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Israeli Military Control to Remain: Because Israel intends to maintain control over Palestinian territorial waters, airspace, borders and international relations, the Gaza Strip will continue to be “occupied territory” under international law. Israel’s duties as an Occupying Power, pursuant to the Fourth Geneva Convention (including the duty to protect and ensure the well-being of the Palestinian population under Israel’s control) therefore remain for as long as such control is exercisable.

Israel has also reserved the right to militarily invade the Occupied Gaza Strip under the undefined pretext of “self-defense” (including “preventative steps”), while simultaneously demanding that the Occupied Gaza Strip be demilitarized, with no means to protect itself from an Israeli invasion.

Coming weeks will reveal whether jewish state is based on rule of law or rule of religion

After months of routine posturing, run-of-the-mill demonstrations and traditional political bargaining, the debate over disengagement has suddenly taken a very dangerous turn. With Masada-style defiance, the anti-disengagement forces have crossed national red lines in an overt and startling manner that could potentially undermine Israeli democracy. Three sacred cows have been brazenly challenged - the rule of law, the Israeli Army and even the memory of the Holocaust. At risk are not only Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plans for withdrawal from Gaza, but also the stability of Israel's civil foundations and the future unity of the country.

While the implications of the current escalation are profound, many observers believe that the battle being waged against the Gaza disengagement should be viewed as the first salvo in the bigger war against withdrawal from the West Bank. Along with the tremendous anguish felt by the settlers over the forced evacuation from their homes, the massive defiance in Gaza, it seems, is a tactical measure designed to thwart any future withdrawal from the West Bank.

The settlers don't deny that the train of disengagement has left the station. Sharon's determined commitment to implement the plan, and the consistent and overwhelming support for it among Israelis (64 percent according to a Dec. 17 Maariv poll) means that the government's Gaza decision will not be overturned. The real fight, then, is to make certain that the train stops here. No more disengagement beyond Gaza, no more Jewish land for Palestinian peace. For the settlers who continue to hold onto the dream of a Greater Israel, Gaza will serve as a sacrificial offering to underscore how painful any additional moves will be.

Two weeks ago, Pinhas Wallerstein, head of the Binyamin Regional Council, called upon his fellow settlers to disobey the "transfer law" even at the price of going to prison. Since then, much stocktaking has occurred, on all sides. The heightened attempts by settlers at influencing public opinion - wearing orange Stars of David recalling the yellow stars imposed by the Nazis, registering thousands of soldiers who will refuse to carry out evacuation orders - have shocked and frightened the general public. The outraged reaction of so many Israelis quickly conveyed to the settler leadership that extreme measures were more likely to reduce support for their cause rather than gain sympathy.

Given the enormous task before them, the army is carefully contemplating its moves. The chief of staff has made it clear that there will be no gray areas concerning refusal of orders, and only those soldiers with immediate family members living in the evacuated settlements will be relieved of duty. Police Commissioner Moshe Karadi, whose forces will join with the army in carrying out the evacuation, says it will be harder than Yamit: "The evacuation will be hard to execute, but if it is not executed - this will be dangerous for Israeli democracy."

Both the army and attorney general's office are more concerned about the explosive potential of the extremist minority in the settlements than about a mass uprising. Disturbing as it is that an elected leader like Wallerstein has called on the public to break the law, it is widely believed that deep psychological and emotional distress experienced by the settlers will not translate, by and large, into violent behavior and disregard for the law. Officials believe that the settler community fully understands that large-scale disobedience will bring the country to the brink of disaster. Indeed, a poll last week in Yediot Aharonot showed that 74 percent of the settler population is opposed to using violence, though 52 percent said they will resist evacuation and 42 percent are prepared to break the law.

In recent days, settler leaders including Wallerstein have echoed these sentiments, by declaring their intention not to resort to violence, while maintaining that passive resistance will be employed. According to one settler who intends to block the evacuation, "they will have to drag us out." Vowing to be at the settlers' side are 12 members of the Knesset, led by National Religious Party leader Effie Eitam, who have committed to "prevent with our bodies the immoral and inhumane expulsion of thousands of settlers who are heroes and pioneers ... while respecting democracy and without committing any violence or displaying hatred or disrespect toward security forces."

When the day finally arrives, the anti-disengagement forces are counting on tens of thousands of people to join the struggle and physically resist evacuation. They will gather at junctions in the Gush Katif area and on roads leading to it, so that thousands of troops will be needed to clear them away. If scenes from the recent sit-in at the Sa-Nur settlement - where mothers were dragged off with infants in their arms - are any indication, the evacuation will not be easy on any level. One defiant settler asked: "What will they do to us, set up detention camps and put thousands of people in them? I say, already put me in prison today, because I will be there despite the evacuation-compensation bill that prohibits it. I want to see the State of Israel arresting tens of thousands of people and shoving them into giant prison camps in the Negev."

At the same time, the extremist fringe is a fuse waiting to blow. "Numerically insignificant," one Efrat resident explained, "this small and highly dangerous element does not accept the authority of the Council of Settlers. They are settlers within the settlers; they live in outposts, they are anti-establishment and no one has control over them. They are armed, they know how to use their arms, and they are not averse to using them."

Reacting to the snowballing developments, Sharon said in a Cabinet meeting in late December 2004 that he views calls

for dissension seriously, and warned: "Let nobody dare to lift a hand against a soldier or policeman." Added Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz: "We will enforce the law with determination and without compromise. Attempts to hurt the security establishment must stop."

But after losing an important Knesset Law Committee vote on the evacuation and compensation bill, which included strong punitive clauses against individuals who resist or disrupt evacuation by force, the premier's leverage is shaky at best. Bentzi Lieberman, Chairman of the Council of Settlers, called the measures "draconian" and denounced the government's legislative conduct as a "gang rape of democracy."

In all, the essential nature of the Jewish state will be revealed in the coming weeks and months, as a fundamental question is answered: What represents the highest authority, the rule of law or the rule of religion? The position of the mainstream settlement rabbis, who supported Wallerstein's call, has never been more important. Professor Shlomo Kaniel, a lecturer at Bar Ilan University's School of Education and a resident of the settlement of Neveh Tzuf, defines the ensuing confrontation as a momentous clash of values. "On the settlers' scale of values, settlement in the Land of Israel is a central ethos that encompasses all spheres of their life; a value that overshadows all other values." The test of authority is upon us, says one very concerned settler. If the rabbis ultimately give a green light to fight the disengagement with violence, "Heaven help us."

I. Introduction

Shortly before midnight on July 22nd, 2002 I heard an unusually loud roar from an aircraft flying low above the skies of Gaza City. Because the sound of Israeli warplanes is commonplace in the area, I didn`t feel particularly alarmed and went to sleep as usual. I was awakened less than a half hour later by a call on my cell phone: An F-16 fighter jet had just dropped a one-ton bomb on an apartment building in one of Gaza City`s poorest and most crowded neighborhoods, about 15 minutes from where I lived.

Ambulances, fire fighters and the press were already on the scene. Salah Shehadeh, leader of the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, was dead. So were 14 others, we learned later on, most of them women and children. Later that morning, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon would proclaim this event “one of [Israel`s] greatest successes.” I wandered through the wreckage of the bombing the following afternoon, practically numb to what I was seeing, what struck me most was that I could have been almost anywhere in the Occupied Territories: Jenin, Ramallah, Khan Yunis, Rafah… The familiarity of the destruction was, for me, the most disturbing thing because it had begun to symbolize the success of a much greater goal: the fragmentation of Palestinian nationhood into ruined, localized identities. As the popularity of Hamas continues to rise and the media blindly heraldthe coming “disengagement” from Gaza, I remember the freshly painted graffiti on a wall near the site of the blastedaway building that hot July day. “This is the Israeli Peace,” it declared.

To View The Full Study as pdf File (91 KB)

Last week, Israel barred a UNESCO fact-finding mission from entering the country, charging that the Palestinians had ‘politicized’ the mission before it had even arrived. The mission was tasked with looking into conditions of historical sites in the Old City of Jerusalem, something Israel apparently found to be very threatening.

Looking at the state of Jerusalem’s eastern sector today, it is understandable why Israel would not want UNESCO or anyone else walking around the Old City, especially the Palestinian-populated parts of it. Because anyone who does, will see the devastation that Israel and its settlers have wreaked on one of the oldest and most beautiful cities in the world.

Excavation works are being conducted in and around the Aqsa Mosque to make way for more Jewish construction at the place where Waqf authorities say Ottoman and Abbasid artifacts have long been tucked away. A Muslim graveyard is being dug up just outside the Old City’s Jaffa Gate, to build – ironically – a museum of tolerance. Today, two stores were forcefully taken over by Jewish settlers in Al Hakari, one of the neighborhoods in the Muslim quarter and every day, it seems that more and more homes are either being demolished by Israeli municipality authorities or being taken over by Jewish settlers.

The “Judiazation” of Jerusalem is a term many Palestinians and Arabs use for what Israel is doing in the city. In a nutshell, it is the long-term plan Israel is gradually carrying out to change the Arab Palestinian character of Jerusalem. This means demolishing old and historical structures, displacing Palestinians, handing over their homes to settlers and trying to erase the Palestinian or Arab history of the city.

The sad truth is that, on the surface, Israel has succeeded in this to a large extent. Pockets of Jewish settlers now live in the heart of Muslim quarters and aim to take over more and more. Sheikh Jarrah, one of the more affluent Palestinian neighborhoods of Jerusalem, is now pierced with Jewish flags waving from homes that have been wrestled from their Palestinian owners, and Israel’s light rail train cuts right down through Palestinian neighborhoods outside of the city center. The train, of course, is not meant to service the Palestinian population but rather to connect Jewish neighborhoods and settlements in the city, but the area confiscated from Shufat and Beit Hanina for its construction simply fell into the plan.

What the UNESCO mission would not have seen even if they made it into the Old City is the overall humiliation that the Palestinian population of Jerusalem must endure on a daily basis because of Israel’s military occupation. Trips to the Israeli ministry of interior must be made just to prove that one lives in the city for fear that their residency rights may be revoked; young Palestinian men are stopped randomly by Israeli soldiers to check their ID cards or just to harass them, and settlers are always given the luxury of maximum security whenever they walk the streets. If settlers want to march through the city, the Palestinians are told to close their shops, are barred for hours from reaching their homes if they run along the path of the march and are always the ones blamed if any kind of confrontation between the two sides breaks out.

Jerusalem is being squeezed by these measures more and more each day. But there is always that glimmer of hope, that strength that shines through proving that all is not lost. On Shavuot, Israeli settlers and extremists poured into the Old City, singing loudly, banging on the shop doors and waving huge Israeli flags. The sight was disconcerting to say the least. However, the afternoon of that same day, at Damascus Gate, passersby were met with a completely different scene. Palestinian flags waved in determined Palestinian hands under the threatening eye of heavily armed Israeli police and soldiers. The youths were fearless, demanding freedom, with strong, unrelenting voices.

The sight of the Palestinian flag waving at the entrance to Damascus Gate was a breath of fresh air. All is not lost and never will be because hope is eternal and determination and strength come from a never-ending spring.

That day at Damascus Gate is what all Palestinians must keep in their minds’ eye in spite of the daily oppression of the occupation. No matter how many missions Israel bars from entering or how many houses it takes over, there will always be those brave souls who, despite the risks, will always raise Palestine’s flag.

Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.

There is no point falling into the pit of countering the claims being made about the death of Mohammed Al Durra, the 12-year old boy from Gaza whose videotaped killing was seen around the world. The boy, crouching in fear behind is equally afraid father as bullets whizzed around them, was killed admittedly by the Israeli army. Later, the army recanted after investigating the tape, saying Durra was killed by Palestinian fire instead. Well now, Israel is changing its story altogether, saying he was not killed at all. In fact, he was probably not even wounded and the French channel that broadcast the footage and brought some pretty bad rap to Israel, had most likely filmed a charade.

The reason why I will not waste my time countering this claim is that even with the great lengths the Israeli government went to to prove that the boy was never killed, it could not provide any irrefutable proof that Mohammed Al Durra – who would be 25 now – is still alive. No pictures, no testimonies, no hospital or morgue officials giving statements to refute his death, have been provided. Only sketchy information about ‘poor quality footage’ and the fact that it seems as though the boy moved his arm after he had slumped over his father following the explosion.

My point is this: indeed, Mohammed Durra’s death was at least one of the catalysts that fueled the second Intifada, and thus, was an important event in the history of the Palestinians. However, more importantly – most importantly to me –is the fact that this is about a boy who died in sheer terror, with his distraught father futilely trying to shelter him from the barrage of bullets coming their way.

Mohammed Al Durra was a boy, with a life, a family and friends. He died a horrible death and now he is being made to die a second one. I did not know Mohammed or his family, but I can only imagine how awful it must be for them to read these claims now and feel the pain of losing their child all over again. If nothing else, this is disrespect for human life of the worst kind.

Some may postulate that the rehashing of the Durra case is a personal jab at the French cameraman who shot the footage, Charles Enderlin. Perhaps. But as a Palestinian who has seen the pain endured by numerous families who receive the horrible news that their sons or daughters have been killed by the Israeli army, my concern is for his family and for his memory. He should be left to rest in peace. If Israel has axes to grind with French journalists or with the international community for holding it accountable for its actions, then so be it. Israel is not lacking in the public relations department.

That being said, there is just one decent thing left to do. Leave Mohammed Al Durra and his memory alone.

Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.

This week Palestinians will commemorate Al Nakba, the catastrophe that befell the Palestinian people when Israel was founded. Every year, Palestinians hang placards pointing to the right of return, they carry keys symbolizing the homes they were forced to leave and could not return to and remember the Palestine that was lost to them 65 years ago.

This year will be no different. Every May 15, Palestinian recall their catastrophe and demand justice. They demand that they are granted the right of return for those who were made refugees virtually overnight and were then relegate to a life they did not choose. But more than anything, they demand recognition of the tragedy that befell them rather than a denial that it ever happened, or worse, that it was of their own making.

It has been 65 years since Israel was established in 1948, which means those who were cast into exile are either very old or have long passed. Those who experienced the Nakba are now few and far between, clinging to those few precious memories of a small garden in front of their house in Jaffa or of the salty smell of the sea in their neighborhood in Haifa. The rest of us are either descendants of these refugees or ordinary Palestinians who feel their cause is our cause because we are one people.

But the Palestinians have made one thing clear. The refugee issue will not die with the last refugee. It is felt nationwide, the loss, the injustice and the fact that those who were forced from their homes have mostly passed, longing for their beloved homes.

We cannot turn back time. What was lost has been altered, destroyed, changed or taken over by Israel’s newcomers. What we can do is hold on to the right to be recognized, for the injustice to be rectified in word and deed and for Palestine to never be lost in our minds or hearts.

Joharah Baker is a Writer for the Media and Information Department at the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH). She can be contacted at mid@miftah.org.