Background:

The Israeli-imposed siege and the frequent aggressions targeting medical facilities in Gaza have debilitated the health sector and its capacity to provide proper medical services. This is exacerbated in cases of chronic diseases, which gives rise to a need to leave the Gaza Strip to receive medical treatment in the occupied West Bank, including Jerusalem, or elsewhere. However, Israel imposes a strict and discriminatory permit regime, which has a disproportionate impact on medical patients given their conditions, and it is not unusual for these permits to be significantly delayed or ultimately refused by Israel.

The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH) collected questionnaires from 102 women diagnosed with cancer in the Gaza Strip to assess the quality of the treatment, availability of equipment, accessibility, and referral process.

The full report is accessible here.

Conclusion and recommendations:

The 16-year-long Israeli-imposed blockade and closure on Gaza have had detrimental impacts on the health sector in the besieged Strip. Specifically, the siege has compromised the ability of the healthcare sector to deliver proper medical services due to the absence of crucial medication, equipment, and supplies under flimsy security pretexts. Ultimately, frequent aggressions and targeting of health facilities and the Israeli-imposed siege on Gaza compromise the availability, accessibility, and quality of healthcare services available to Palestinians in Gaza.

MIFTAH urges the international community to:

• Put an end to Israel’s impunity and hold it accountable for its persistent crimes, including the crime against humanity of apartheid, through the adoption of effective and concrete measures;

• Exert pressure to lift the blockade on the Gaza Strip and allow for the free movement of people and goods;

• Ensure the urgent implementation of UNSCR 1325 to provide immediate protection for Palestinian women and to put an end to Israel’s impunity;

• Support the UN Special Rapporteur in the oPt, the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion, the ICC investigation and the UN Commission of Inquiry.

The summary factsheet is accessible here.

The legislation of the family protection bill is aimed at the protection of the family itself as an institution, and to guarantee its preservation. Palestinian legislators are aware of the importance of this bill, which is why all ministries and official institutions committed to developing its relevant programs, policies and plans, each according to their field of expertise. Their goal is to contribute to the promotion of a culture that combats domestic violence and encourages the response of public policies to this objective, through education, health, legislation and the media. Another objective is to track the bill’s impact and periodically assess it in cooperation with other civil societies. This paper focuses on some of the financial indicators pertaining to this bill.

All family members in Palestine are subjected to violence, including children, minors, women and men. However, married women remain the sector most vulnerable to domestic violence according to a 2019 Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics survey. It said 29.4% of married women had been subjected to at least one type of violence by their husbands as opposed to 13% of men who had been subjected to violence by their wives, by their own confession. A total of 44.7% of individuals who have never been married have been subjected toviolence;7.6% of the elderly and 44.2% of children(12-17yearsold) were the victims of violence at the hands of one of their parents. Although a high percentage of women have been victims of violence from their spouse, a considerable percentage of these women, around 60.3% preferred to stay silent about the assault. Only a small percentage of women asked for help through official avenues; 2.9% went to a defence lawyer to file a lawsuit against their husbands, 1.3% went to the police or a family protection unit and 1.4% went to the centres for mental, social and legal aid.

Financial indicators for the Family Protection Bill

The table above shows that the estimated and main additional cost of the Ministry of Social Development to be around ILS4 million a year, considering that the other parties (police, prosecution and courts) are currently carrying out their roles without fully allocating specialized departments for protection from violence. However, if these parties do allot specialized departments for protection from violence, overall costs will reach approximately ILS16.2 million. Nonetheless, even if this cost is incurred, it still only comprises a small part of public expenditures, approximately 0.1%. Overall public expenditures for 2022 amount to approximately ILS16.2 billion, which means the cost of passing this bill and implementing its provisions will not constitute financial burden on the general budget and will not be an obstacle to ratifying the law by decree.

Furthermore, it should be noted that while it is imperative to calculate some of the costs resulting from violence against women, the reaerate the high costs as well. The secret social costs, which impact society as a whole. Data from the Ministry of Social Development showed (see graph), that violence exercised against women has prompted around 60% of them to flee their homes. Also, 18% of them attempted suicide in addition to suffering from mental and physical illnesses, unwanted pregnancies or others. Calculating expenses incurred from violence is not an easy process and there are no national data or figures that can measure the impact violence has on the state’s general budget due to the prevalent mentality towards violence as an issue associated only with women. This is especially true when the conversation is about the indirect and intangible effects of violence, including:

Violations of human rights; negative social, economic and political impacts; working women who get sick and need to take sick leave; lack of focus and productivity; impact of violence on children and academic failure; the rise in the percentage of school dropouts among children; the rise in long-term unemployment rates; the percentage of homeless children who become a burden on society; government expenditures for medical treatment; safehouses; therapy; monitoring cases of violence against women; individual expenses for following up on legal cases and lawyer fees; loss of income because of repeated absence from work or inefficacy; social expenses resulting from the breakup of the family; expenses of training individuals on how to deal with cases of violence; expenses for issuing laws and legislation on the protection of women from violence.

Confirmation of the above is that the UN believes the economic, social and health costs of violence against women are, to a large extent, undocumented and unrecognized. However, these remain colossal, according to researchers, specialists and defenders of women’s rights.

To view the full factsheet as PDF

Background:

The illegal Israeli settlement project, including settler-only bypass roads, military checkpoints, and the annexation wall, continues to expand and steal more Palestinian land and resources. As of today, the number of illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, including Jerusalem, is close to 300, with around 750,000 Jewish settlers residing in them.

Israeli state-sanctioned settler terrorism against Palestinian civilians and property is prevalent and has been on the rise in recent years. Violence takes the form of psychological, physical, and verbal violence, including beating, throwing stones or sharp tools, intimidation, shooting, verbal assaults, and assaults on agricultural lands, cars, and homes. Such attacks are committed in the presence of Israeli occupation forces who often join them.

The high frequency of these forms of violence and their persistence give rise to psychological, physical, and material harm. Palestinian survivors of settler terrorism seldom press charges and file complaints against Israeli settlers given the complicity of the Israeli law enforcement system.

The Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy (MIFTAH) and the Women’s Center for Legal and Counseling (WCLAC) collected questionnaires from 229 Palestinian women covering settler violence in the occupied West Bank governorates of Al-Khalil/Hebron, Bethlehem, and Jerusalem.

MIFTAH calls on the international community to:

Put an end to Israel’s impunity and hold it accountable for its persistent crimes, including the crime against humanity of apartheid, through the adoption of effective and concrete measures;

Stop all relations and trade with illegal Israeli settlements including international companies that profit from them;

Criminalize and blacklist Israeli settler groups that engage in terrorist activities and hold those with dual citizenship accountable in their respective states;

Ensure the urgent implementation of UNSCR 1325 to provide immediate protection for Palestinian women and to put an end to Israel’s impunity;

Support the UN Special Rapporteur in the oPt, the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion, the ICC investigation and the UN Commission of Inquiry.

• The summary factsheet is accessible here.

• The full report is accessible here.

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