Harry's Place

You know what? Somebody has a screw loose imo.

What the hell is this supposed to accomplish? Surely normalization, improving people’s lives, is a major step toward peace and away from violence?

Do we really know all the details? Or is this just another case of instantaneous lashing out at Israel, assuming automatically that it’s in the wrong.

The Haaretz article from yesterday is fairly detailed but if you can find more primary sources please let us know. There may be more stuff coming out today.

Clearly somebody forgot to bribe the right person at the right time with the right amount of dosh.

it seems like another case of Israeli corruption.. the country is getting worse than Italy

The BBC got its story from Amira Hass’ article in Ha’aretz.

Ha’aretz is the Israeli equivalent of The Guardian, and with equivalent partisanship on disputes with Palestinians. Amira Hass lives in Ramallah and all her articles unvaryingly present the Palestinians she features as innocent victims of the brutal racist oppressive land-grabbing Israeli occupation regime. She makes Robert Fisk look like a paid Zionist Federation asset.

This is a story about planning infringements in a part of the world where planning infringements on the part of developers are extremely common.

It suits the Israeli developer very well to go along with the story, but it’s just as possible that he thought he’d get away with his never-mind-the-permits attitude. He doesn’t actually claim that he did get the necessary permits.

Overwhelmingly, it’s told from the point of view of Palestinians who are currently threatening to set up a new Intifida, unilaterally declare Palestinian statehood, and who invariably portray the Israeli government as an oppressive, brutal opponent.

There are of course alternative accounts of this story, but MoreMediaNonsense has already leapt to his/her standpoint of “Why does Israel Do Things Like This”, not “Why do unscrupulous developers and Palestinian propaganda outfits use stories like this to whip up anti-Israel sentiments?”

Here’s a extended account of the Israeli government’s viewpoint which MoreMediaNonsense left out of the post. Why?

Recently, there have been meetings and discussions between representatives of the Civil Administration and Palestinians at the very highest level, with the goal of resolving the issue of the construction of the Al-Bireh stadium. This has been in the wake of the official measures taken against the construction that was undertaken without the proper permits and in an illegal location. The Civil Administration is working with the civil-affairs ministry of the Palestinian Authority to prepare and submit an amendment to the existing zoning plan, and following that, the possibility of a permit, in principal, for the continuation of construction will be considered.”

And here’s the substance of the original notice about planning infringements, again left out of MMN’s indignantly partisan account:

The document claims that work on the stadium’s stands is being carried out “without a license,” and contains other standard admonitions: “You were given an opportunity to appear before the inspection subcommittee to state your case. The subcommittee has concluded that the aforementioned work was carried out without proper permission … You are hereby obligated, in accordance with section …. of the 1966 City, Village and Buildings Planning Law, to cease activity upon and use of said land, and to raze the building … and to restore the location to its previous state within 7 days … If you do not act as required, all legal means will be taken against you, including demolition of the structure and any means required to restore the situation to its prior state, at your expense.”

So the Palestinian officials are claiming that Israel is doing this deliberately to exert pressure on the Palestinian Authority, are they? It doesn’t happen to be part of their own campaign at the moment to present themselves as so oppressed by Israeli construction on the West Bank that they’re about to either start a new Intifada and/or unilaterally declare a Palestinian state in spite of their commitment under the Oslo Accord not to take actions of this sort? No, of course not.

it seems like another case of Israeli corruption

Do you actually KNOW anything about Israel?

(Being an “Independent” reader doesn’t count).

Judy – this stadium work has been going on for over a year without any problems from the Israeli authorities and was originally OK’d by the authorities :

“In October 2008, when the field was ready, FIFA president Joseph Blatter and Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad laid the cornerstone for the stadium. The governments of France and Germany are paying for the construction of stands. The outer wall, the lighting and the scoreboard are being financed by the Al-Bireh municipality, which owns the land and within whose jurisdiction the stadium is located.

In 1973, the municipality submitted for the approval of the IDF a detailed plan for the area where the stadium is now located. It received final approval from Israel’s National Planning and Building Council and Supreme Planning Council in 1981.”

So now someone comes along and says “Hang on, stop, you haven’t got the correct permissions”. What kind of rubbish administration is that ? Are you proud of a state that is so inefficient and arbitrary ? This isn’t some little house extension we’re talking about here, its a massive project.

Gordon, anyone who has tried to run a business in Tel Aviv knows how rampant Israeli corruption is.. particularly if you are trying to establish one

and no I don’t read the Independent but hey thanks for making baseless assumptions you coward

Anyway – what business is it of Israel who builds what on this part of the West Bank ? This isn’t in a settlement and the building isn’t a threat to anyone. If the Palestinians can’t vote for the Israeli govt why do they have to take notice of their arbitrary decrees about development ?

I don’t read the Independent but hey thanks for making baseless assumptions you coward

Coward? Do you actually know what the word means?

MMN: Israel has an obligation in law to prevent anarchy, and yes – that does include enforcing building regulations.

But there’s an elected Palestinian authority in this area isn’t there ?

Even if you think the Palestinians shouldn’t have jurisdiction here what’s the excuse for allowing the work to go on for years and then halting it ?

In 1973, the municipality submitted for the approval of the IDF a detailed plan for the area where the stadium is now located. It received final approval from Israel’s National Planning and Building Council and Supreme Planning Council in 1981.”
So now someone comes along and says “Hang on, stop, you haven’t got the correct permissions”. What kind of rubbish administration is that ? Are you proud of a state that is so inefficient and arbitrary ?

That’s “a detailed plan for the area where the stadium is located” from 26 years ago, not a specific planning application for this particular stadium. That’s like saying because Barnet Council gave general approval for the redevelopment of the Graham Park area 26 years ago, I can stick a football stadium anywhere I choose to in Graham Park.

Property developers get up to this sort of stuff all the time all over the world.
If you care to research what the Israeli government is doing to help Palestinian development on the West Bank at the moment, you’ll see that a high percentage of checkpoints have been dismantled, there is a very large number of developments going ahead, many like this one with the active involvement of Israeli developers and the Israeli government.

It is the business of the Israeli government because the Palestinians signed up to an agreement at Oslo and subsequently which cedes certain areas to Palestinian control, certain areas to Israeli control and certain areas to shared control. But then if you’re entirely partisan towards the Palestinian propaganda in this situation, why should the Palestinians have to take any notice of their own agreements?

“The building isn’t a threat to anyone”

And you did your risk assessment and planning inspection when?
And it’s OK to flout planning regulations that cover the area if you personally make such decisions?

There is no excuse for messing around over planning like this. Whether the cause is corruption, vindictiveness or crapness, it is still unacceptable and hugely counterproductive.

“It is the business of the Israeli government because the Palestinians signed up to an agreement at Oslo and subsequently which cedes certain areas to Palestinian control, certain areas to Israeli control and certain areas to shared control.”

According to the piece the control of the area is moot :

“The Al-Bireh municipality has not, however, received any maps from Israel demarcating the exact location of the parts of the town defined as Area C. Their location has been surmised, based on the tabu (Land Registry) documents submitted to the municipality, as per the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement: The lots for which the Civil Administration did not submit documents to the city are understood to belong to Area C. But Area C is not a planning designation, per se.

“[It is] a political designation, which was supposed to be temporary – to last just 18 months,” explained Al-Abed, an architect and city planner, and a former senior official in the Palestinian Planning Ministry. ”

The big issue which you won’t answer Judy is why now try to halt the work when its been going on for years. Either it shows shocking inefficiency on the part of the Israelis or its a pure political decision to put pressure on the PA because of the arguments re new settlements.

“There is no excuse for messing around over planning like this. Whether the cause is corruption, vindictiveness or crapness, it is still unacceptable and hugely counterproductive.”

In Israel it could be corruption (anyone who thinks Israel is not rife with corruption, needs to get their vision corrected) but most likely it is just because Israel can. It is frustrating because when you try to defend Israel, there are just things, like this, that are completely indefensible. Zoning violations? Give me a break!

Zoning violations? Give me a break!

According to Gabriel and similar knee-jerk posters and commenters, Israel should not enforce planning regulations because he personally perceives it as “frustrating”. The Israeli authorities should consult him in every such case, to see how he is getting on in his arguments with Israel’s enemies: if it’s been a good day, it’s OK, they can proceed with enforcing the law. If it’s been a frustrating day for him, they should pass.

Judy,
First corrupt rabbis … now allegedly corrupt planning departments … have you noticed this latest spate of stories about Israel? It’s interesting, isn’t it, that MMN isn’t posting about corruption in the UK, where HP is based. Ah well, there is nil corruption in the UK, of course.
So, starting from A, how about corruption stories from Austria? No? Argentina? What about Australia? Still no corruption at all?
Let’s try Bulgaria … and here we are at Zambia, and still zilch. Nada. Israel is the only country for corruption stories. Natch.

I have no idea about the rights and wrongs of this particular project, we should not rush to conclusions, and I don’t know about conditions today, but Ephraim Kishon was satirising political and bureaucratic corruption in Israel way back in the 60s, when I discovered and loved his books on my first visit to Israel as a child. See the synopsosis of this story,The Blaumilch Canal made into a film:

Blaumilch is a patient in an asylum who manages to escape by sneaking onto a milk truck. He is dropped off in the middle of downtown Tel Aviv, where a road construction crew is busy making repairs. Blaumilch grabs a jackhammer and begins to dig a hole in the road. The police halt traffic, believing he is part of the road crew. The irate mayor demands an investigation and finds no one willing to admit that they were unaware of the hole-digging project. Through a series of bureaucratic bungles, departments clamor to receive credit for the unauthorized dig. Soon heavy equipment is called for to aid in the endeavor that everyone is afraid not to know about, as the hole becomes a canal that eventually reaches to the sea. When an official discovers the whole project is a mistake, he is hauled off to the asylum. Blaumilch, feeling his efforts have been overlooked, begins digging another hole in this satirical comedy.

And this article about the founding of Sdeh Boker where the lack of planning permission was the least of it (yes its Haaretz I know, but Anshel Pfeffer is no Amira Hass). Ben Gurion did not do this for personal gain, but to make the desert bloom, but we make ourselves hostages to fortune if we protest that it is impossible there is any corruption or inefficiency in planning matters in Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/993214.html

No Gordon – this is about the Israeli authorities doing something in a ridiculously inefficient and/or petty way that severely annoys many people who generally support Israel like I do.

Perhaps you don’t care about that – well fine for you, but others do as you see above.

Anyway I didn’t mention corruption just inefficiency and/or pettiness so your point about HP writing many stories about Israeli corruption is utter garbage.

I think I’m starting to get the point about how some partisans refuse to allow any criticism of Israel. I wonder if they realise how counter productive they are.

I wonder if anyone realises that the Fort Hood Shooter’s family come from Al-Birah?

Could anyone tell me the legal basis for the permits to build exclusive Jewish settlements and exclusive Jewish roads in the West Bank?

Gordon Bennet: Maybe you have missed something, but there is a kind of dispute going on about the West Bank and it kind of has international implications. Correct me if I am wrong, but Zambia and Bulgaria don’t have this kind of dispute. For what it’s worth, the PA is hideously corrupt and can hardly be regarded as better than the Israeli state.

Nachman – And ? So what ? Talk about guilt by association.

On another thread here we have Oliver Miles being correctly called out for making insinuations about 2 of the Iraq war inquiry being Jewish and here we have Nachman doing the same kind of thing with insinuations about the inhabitants of Al-Bireh.

You couldn’t make it up.

The title of your post is incorrect.
You are not asking “why”, you are making a judgment.

Personally, I would like to know why. An Amira Hass article in Haaretz, carries very little credibility, but does raise questions that I would be interested in knowing the answer to. Taking the article at face value without any hearing of the other side is at the very least poor journalism, especially when the article itself raises some pretty big red flags (such as why would a large international project not have obtained the proper licensing).

Stan

I don’t know the details of this matter but as Judy says, Amira Hass is hardly an ‘objective’ source. I don’t know if this is the case, but it is quite possible that the Israelis ordered construction to cease because it was found belatedly the Palestinians didn’t own the land. You might be flabbergasted to learn that 145,976 dunams in the Ramallah area of the so-called ‘Arab’ West Bank was actually Jewish-owned before 1948. Another 688,118 was Jewish-owned in around Tulkarem and around Nablus the figure is 5,850. (All this from Michael Fischbach’s book Jewish property Claims against Arab Countries, p 85). Another 880, 195 dunams were Jewish-owned in ‘Arab’ East Jerusalem.

MMN

Actually the ‘detailed plan’ is 36 years old, the ‘permision’ 28 years old, citing them was ridiculous. I’m perfectly happy to criticise israel (someones head should roll for allowing this pr disaster to develop) and vindictiveness, political considerations and or corruption may play a part here, but nobody shouting it has any evidence of it. but bureacracies move slowly, negotiations appear to have happened-

“Recently, there have been meetings and discussions between representatives of the Civil Administration and Palestinians at the very highest level, with the goal of resolving the issue of the construction ”

The isrealis appear to be open to resolving the technical impediments to any constrruction-

“The Civil Administration is working with the civil-affairs ministry of the Palestinian Authority to prepare and submit an amendment to the existing zoning plan”

and the israelis appear to have tried to hold meetings regarding the construction that were ignored, with the Palestinians being-

“given an opportunity to appear before the inspection subcommittee to state your case”

This is all normal bureacratic stuff, except that the ‘applicants’ dont appear to be applying very hard. If the Israelis had stormed into an entirely innocuous construction site in week one you would be shouting foul just as loudly and with a potentially much stronger rationale.

“I think I’m starting to get the point about how some partisans refuse to allow any criticism of Israel. I wonder if they realise how counter productive they are.”

Seriously, are you sure you arent starting to get a little partisan and refuse to allow any defence of Israel.

“I don’t know if this is the case, but it is quite possible that the Israelis ordered construction to cease because it was found belatedly the Palestinians didn’t own the land.”

That doesn’t seem to be the case, its more that who controls the land under the 1995 accords is under debate :

“It emerges that some of the land in question, which the municipality designated for a school and other public buildings in the early 1970s, had the misfortune to later be defined as being in Area C (see box). Amid the 11,000 dunams (2,750 acres) that fall within the city’s bounds, there are several such Area C “blotches” – for the most part, in areas close to where the settlements of Psagot and Beit El, as well as IDF and Civil Administration bases, were built, on the lands of Al-Bireh and Ramallah. The headquarters of Jawal (the Palestinian cell-phone company) is located in Area C, as is the house of Dr. Samih Al-Abed, who heads the Palestinian team at the territory and border negotiation committee. Even part of the residence of PA President Mahmoud Abbas is in Area C.

The Al-Bireh municipality has not, however, received any maps from Israel demarcating the exact location of the parts of the town defined as Area C. Their location has been surmised, based on the tabu (Land Registry) documents submitted to the municipality, as per the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian interim agreement: The lots for which the Civil Administration did not submit documents to the city are understood to belong to Area C. But Area C is not a planning designation, per se.

“[It is] a political designation, which was supposed to be temporary – to last just 18 months,” explained Al-Abed, an architect and city planner, and a former senior official in the Palestinian Planning Ministry.

“It is unjust, unreasonable and unfair to have to request and to wait for an Israeli license to build within the blotches of Area C that are within approved and recognized municipal areas,” he said this week, pointing out that, “It is Al-Bireh that provides all services to the citizenry, including those bits of Area C that are in the municipal area: cleaning, garbage collection, maintenance, renovations, construction.”

Musa Jwayyed, the Al-Bireh city engineer, says that over the years, various structures have been built in areas within the municipal borders that are apparently part of Area C, and that the city has also carried out the necessary infrastructure work in those areas, including preparation of a sewerage network, and the paving of roads and sidewalks – without requesting licenses from the Civil Administration.”

It appears there has been other building in this area with no response from the Israeli authorities, so again the question remains – why are they trying to stop building in this area on this project now ?

bos – “but bureacracies move slowly, ”

So you think its acceptable and efficient government to try to stop a major internationally importantgn project 3 years after you’ve allowed it to start ? When you’ve allowed other building in the same area without these licences ?

“Seriously, are you sure you arent starting to get a little partisan and refuse to allow any defence of Israel.”

I’m fully prepared to hear more defence from the Israeli authorities of their behaviour here but TBH would prefer to hear they’re going to let the whole issue lapse (which may well happen given what a publicity disaster this is in danger of becoming).

It’ll be interesting to see what happens.

It’s not about PR, it’s about doing what’s right. There seems to have been little inclination by the Israeli state to assess the legality of various Jewish settlements or the forced displacement of Arabs in Israeli territory. So why kick up a fuss about the land being used for something as benign as a football stadium?

Bit of an own goal really. I’m generally a big supporter of Israel but this smacks of petty, vindictive behaviour. It also ’spins’ badly in the PR arena – ‘nasty israelis stops palestinian kids playing footy etc’. There are more important things than town & country planning.

MMN “So you think its acceptable and efficient government to try to stop a major internationally importantgn project 3 years after you’ve allowed it to start ? When you’ve allowed other building in the same area without these licences ?”

efficient – no
other buildings- seriously? your citing there failure to demolish improperly permited municipal sewage or road and pavement repairs as evidence of an oppressive system? what were the other buildings?

you can dispute the basis and technicalities of Israel’s authority in the west bank, but you cant in good faith construe their decisions to turn a blind eye to some constructions and not others as evidence of an insidious policy of collective coercion or punishment.

they did not allow the construction of the stadium to begin three years ago, they failed to send in the bulldozers and stop it (if they had i doubt you or any of the currently outraged would have said ‘ah, swift efficient bueacracy in action, i bet their trains run on time’), in any event it would appear that all that was built in the first 26 months was a ‘field’. Another point is what exactly was built in the first year (plus) if the guy who designed the field designed it around the stadium plans which he recieved two years ago? your analysis of the anti Israeli/pro Palestinian narrative here is really uncritical and does you no credit. In any event the stands werent begun until ten months ago, and they would have started with holes in the ground like everything else. I would hazzard a guess that it was probably after they started reaching for the skyline that the israeli’s first got in touch and said, “hey guys, your permits a teensy weensy bit out of date and for a construction the size of a football stadium we really think we might insist on having a little look at your final/solid proposal, Maybe your application was lost in the post so if you could e-mail us a copy at insidiousoccupationbureacracy@israeligov.com that would be great!
PS, sorry to be such Zionazi’s about it lol.”

Seriously, its a football stadium, the standard planning ramifications would be considerable. In an area that regularly becomes a war zone they are even more so. I dont know the exact geography of the area, but I can percieve why the Israelis might percieve it to be in their best interests to maintain the principle of right to veto over such constructions.

The Israelis are clearly perfectly willing to piss off Britain and France, but do you think they would do it for self damaging fun?

So ……….acceptable?….in the terms you phrase it, No, (but they were kinda loaded), after reflecting on the actual details available to us , yes

Do you percieve any partial culpability on the Palestinian side for failing to respond to Israel’s request that they submit proper planning application? any remote possibility that they may have been looking forward to this fairly predictable hiccup thats really unlikely to stop them getting the stadium in the end?

I just read MMN’s comment and fell off my chair laughing. In Yiddish there is a saying “auf der ganef brent der hittle” if the cap fits wear it – all I did was to point out that the family of the Fort Hood killer came from al-Bireh i.e. what a coincidence no more than that! Calm down you are so obsessed with this story which at worst is a case of bureaucracy gone mad (not an isolated incident in Israel just speak to the families expelled from Gush Kattif who have had to endure hardship and deprivation these past four years through indescribable bureaucratic machinations to the extent that this story pales into insignificance – that you have lost all sense of proportion it’s a football pitch after all!

“I would hazzard a guess that it was probably after they started reaching for the skyline that the israeli’s first got in touch and said, “hey guys, your permits a teensy weensy bit out of date…”

Ehhh ? Are you sure ?

“In October 2008, when the field was ready, FIFA president Joseph Blatter and Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad laid the cornerstone for the stadium. The governments of France and Germany are paying for the construction of stands. The outer wall, the lighting and the scoreboard are being financed by the Al-Bireh municipality, which owns the land and within whose jurisdiction the stadium is located.”

This major international event starting the construction happened in October 2008 and at the time there were no Israeli objections.

“Do you percieve any partial culpability on the Palestinian side for failing to respond to Israel’s request that they submit proper planning application? any remote possibility that they may have been looking forward to this fairly predictable hiccup thats really unlikely to stop them getting the stadium in the end?”

Why should the Palestinians go through this pathetic rigmarole now re planning permission on land they own on a project that’s been going on for 3 years ?

These excuses are getting more and more bizarre.

I have a really good idea that will end all planning disputes. Israel can withdraw all troops and relinquish all authority over the West Bank and in return the Palestinian Arabs can relinquish all claims over recognised Israeli territory and stop all terror attacks from their soil. Settle it at that. Then Israelis need never worry about a fucking Arab football pitch. It really is tedious.

It seems as if at least part of the current Israeli govt. has decided to stick Israel’s fingers in the Palestinian’s eyes whenever they get the chance. Given the potential explosiveness (to put it mildly) of the current situtation on the West Bank, this behavior is reckless and may well ignite a new Intifalida of rioting and violence like the first Intifalida of the late 1980s & early 90s. As for corruption in Israel, there have been several studies (check Freedom House for one) that have shown Israel to be roughly on par with Italy. Not a great comparison for a country that is a western democracy like Israel.

Dan in never never land! lol!

Nachman: Well, certainly it seems remote while Netanyahu is in power. There are people on both sides who want to sustain conflict at the expense of their own people, but I hope that those on both sides who want a genuine peaceful and reasonable resolution get the upper hand – sooner rather than later. Everyone knows what is required. I’m sick of hearing about it because these are tiny portions of land, yet world affairs keep being drawn back to these stupid arguments. No doubt there will be entrenchment on both sides over a fucking football pitch, guns fired, stones thrown, people blowing themselves up and kids killed. I can see it now: the Football Intifada. Then some bright spark will build a security wall through the centre line. Pathetic waste of time, money and lives.

Meanwhile, Africa is in a complete mess. Just a little bit of the time and effort put into keeping Israelis and Palestinians from scrapping could stabilise places like Burkina Faso or stop piracy in the Indian Ocean or prevent the mass rape of little girls in North Kivu. You know, that kind of important stuff.

Of course, Israel never sets a foot wrong according to Judy. Rolls eyes.

Since these people are so interested in walls, guns and stuff, build a wall encompassing Israel, the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, pile in lots of ammo and aggregates and cut the place off from the rest of civilisation. After a decade or so, open it back up again and see what the Jews and Arabs have done with the place. Who knows, without all the attention-seeking tantrums and provocations it may turn into a glorious utopia or peace and love and they will have something to teach the rest of us. Or they may be still dying, in which case nothing will have changed and we can consider something else, like nuking Jerusalem.

Actually, I favour bulldozing the Temple Mount, Al-Aqsa Mosque included, and turning it into a massive toxic highly radioactive landfill pit so that no-one will want it for their religion. God ‘aint there, arseholes.

Dan, interesting idea, but have you thought of the impact on tourism?

“Dan, interesting idea, but have you thought of the impact on tourism?”

Yes, it would be a good idea to put the tourists (most of them fundamentalist Christians) in the radioactive pit.

No Gordon – this is about the Israeli authorities doing something in a ridiculously inefficient and/or petty way that severely annoys many people who generally support Israel like I do.

You don’t KNOW that it’s inefficient and/or petty – you don’t have the full details. You are, apparently, one of those people who think that because you “generally support Israel”, you have a right to dictate to Israel every single moves it makes. Well, you don’t. Especially, Israel is not going to do things just to make your own life easier when arguing with antisemites.

haps you don’t care about that – well fine for you, but others do as you see above.

I am hardly the only one here who finds your attitude absurd.

way I didn’t mention corruption just inefficiency and/or pettiness so your point about HP writing many stories about Israeli corruption is utter garbage.

Gold Star for the most mature comment. Or maybe breathtaking literalness. Or something.
Plenty of people did mention corruption. But in any case, the fact is that Israel has been singled out for attacks, without knowing the ins and outs of the case, more than any 5 other countries put together.

I’m starting to get the point about how some partisans refuse to allow any criticism of Israel. I wonder if they realise how counter productive they are.

Touched a nerve, have I? It’s criticism without being in FULL POSSESSION OF THE FACTS I object to. Like screaming blue murder about Israel “deliberately shelling a UN school in Gaza”.

I’m generally a big supporter of Israel but this smacks of petty, vindictive behaviour. It also ’spins’ badly in the PR arena – ‘nasty israelis stops palestinian kids playing footy etc’. There are more important things than town & country planning.

And that’s another one from the MMN school of self-righteousness. It may ’smack’ of whatever you want it to smack, and of whatever your prejudices tell you it smacks.
It’s OK to ignore town & country planning in a faraway country of which you know little or nothing – how about if someone built a stadium with a proper permit in your own street: you’d have no problem with that, right?

Planning laws and land ownership. Sometimes they are convenient, sometimes they are bloody inconvenient: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/30/ap/world/main4763910.shtml

MMN: Your criticism of Israeli government policy makes you an admirer of Adolf Hitler.

Does Israel have the legal authority to pose sanctions like this in the West Bank?
I agree that Israel’s actions are problematic, though I wonder if it’s the overall picture. Many times there are more details than those that are on the surface…

“MMN: Your criticism of Israeli government policy makes you an admirer of Adolf Hitler.”

I know – these people would be laughable if they weren’t so depressing. But then Judy thinks Peter Tatchell is an anti-Semite so any criticism coming from her is a badge of honour.

MMN: I would imagine that there are plenty of loyal Israeli Jewish citizens who also think this is absurd and who hold Bibi in contempt. But no doubt they are self-loathing Jews, etc. If people play the antisemite card – or even infer it (why are you picking on Israel when you aren’t picking on Bulgaria?) – too often, it desensitises people to the grave nature of real antisemitism. I am not an antisemite, I fully support the existence of the Israeli state (therefore, I am a Zionist – no problem with this label either) and I don’t think there is any excuse for the loss of life by Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists who operate as proxies for foreign governments. But while the Israel/Palestinian conflict has far-reaching consequences and while there are serious human rights issues, it is incumbent on the international community to discuss it, formulate a response and for those who are genuinely interested in a peaceful and just resolution to be at the table. At the moment, actions like this football pitch issue look like an immature provocation by a politician who has no desire to end the conflict, but in fact perpetuate it – the Israeli state is part of the problem with Israeli security. Quoting planning regulations is meaningless when the Israeli government has absolutely no respect for the property rights of Palestinian Arabs. Until both sides start to act in good faith and devoid of this pettiness, I am inclined to say ‘fuck you’ to both of them. So call me antisemitic, I couldn’t give a damn.

Dan – do you really believe that Bibi Netanyau has so little to do that he interferes in planning applications in his spare time? Or do you not think that, as in the UK, there might actually be all manner of authorities and bodies which run various aspects of Israeli life which the PM does not actually control in person?

I really don’t know enough about this particular case to comment on the virtually non-existant details, but I will say that any article by Amira Hass should be consumed with bucket-loads of salt. Interestingly, when I searched for other articles in Hebrew on this subject, the same Amira Hass article was the only one to show up.

I will also say that this recent obsession with every nit-picking aspect of Israeli life on HP would be slightly more tolerable from my point of view if people were paying equal attention and devoting similar energies to the issues which I find just a teeny bit more worrying. Like the fact that we’re facing a soon to be nuclear armed genocidal mad man in the face whilst the world twiddles its thumbs with typical foot-shuffling ineffectuality and studiously avoids discussing the very real possibility of a nuclear holocaust in the Middle East.
I for one hope that my Prime Minister is concentrating all his energies on that problem rather than planning applications.

Israelinurse: I don’t know if Bibi has influence to over-rule a football stadium development, but it is rather symptomatic of Israeli government attitudes. Planning regulations are applied to the letter and with great force when it comes to a ramshackle Bedouin tin hut on a bit of rubbly ground or when Arabs build something that is actually worthwhile. But when it comes to Israeli settlements and roads, anything goes. Oh, but there I go again, just antisemitic nit-picking.

Dan, thanks for the link to the CBS News article about how Israeli settlements ignore all sorts of laws including who actually owns the land they build on and are allowed to get away from it. From that article and the Haaretz article it is clear that on the West Bank there is one law for the Israelis and a different law for the Palestinians. You do not have to believe the nonsense that Israel is an Apartheid state to recognize a colonial type occupation on the West Bank complete with settler minority like the French settlers, the pied-noirs in Algeria or the British settlers in Rhodesia. Separate and Unequal Laws, spawned by the Israeli settlements on the West Bank are wrong, and a recipe for violence.

“Yes, it would be a good idea to put the tourists (most of them fundamentalist Christians) in the radioactive pit.

Wow you’re really full of wit, aren’t you?

Planning regulations are applied to the letter and with great force when it comes to a ramshackle Bedouin tin hut on a bit of rubbly ground or when Arabs build something that is actually worthwhile. But when it comes to Israeli settlements and roads, anything goes.

links?

oh never mind. You obviously already have such expert knowledge about how planning regulations have been and currently are legislated and enforced, or not enforced in Israel, being a fluent reader of Hebrew and Arabic with access to primary documents and all, that it would be a waste of time to question you about the veracity of your self-satisfied, “so-call-me-an-antisemite” opinions.

….. is one of several neighborhoods that sit on land occupied by Jordan from 1948-1967, after the withdrawal of the British Mandate. This border is called the Green Line, and it refers only to the 1949 Armistice lines established after the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. … Nor is it fixed, as explained by Justice Stephen M. Schwebel, who spent 19 years as a judge of the International Court of Justice at The Hague, including three years as President. He wrote “…modifications of the 1949 armistice lines among those States within former Palestinian territory are lawful (if not necessarily desirable), whether those modifications are, in Secretary Rogers’s words, “insubstantial alterations required for mutual security” or more substantial alterations — such as recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the whole of Jerusalem.” …

The Palestinians never had sovereignty over the West Bank nor east Jerusalem and Justice Schwebel concluded that since Jordan, the prior holder of these territories had seized that territory unlawfully in 1948, Israel which subsequently took that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense in 1967, has better title to it. Jordan’s illegal annexation of the West Bank and east Jerusalem in 1948 was recognized only by Britain and Pakistan and Jordan now makes no claim to it.

In terms of international law, between 1948 and 1967 this territory was terra nullius, or “land belonging to no one” over which sovereignty may be acquired through occupation. The concept of terra nullius is well recognized in international law.

Lbnaz: I refer to the question I asked earlier. On what legal basis is Israel able to enforce planning regulations in the West Bank? On what legal basis can vacant properties in Jerusalem that are owned by Arabs be confiscated without compensation and given to Jews? And give me links.

Judy: Erm, well, there are human beings living on these lands and many of them have land titles that are completely swept aside. And international law states that the continuing construction of settlements is illegal. By the way, please explain the logic of this occupation. If it is an act of lawful self-defence to protect civilians from being fired upon, why on earth build houses for them in the line of fire on land whose ownership is a major source of dispute?

Do you actually have the stats to back that statement up, Dan? Maybe you would care to present us with the percentages of ramshackle Bedouin tin huts which have fallen foul of Israeli planning laws as opposed to other categories of builders. Maybe you could also back up the statement that ‘anything goes’ as far as Israeli settlements are concerned – are you implying that they are not subject to planning restrictions? And as for ‘Israeli’ roads, I presume you are aware that there’s a reason why some roads are designated for use by different groups of people. It’s a measure which was implimented after dozens of Israelis had been shot, stoned or burned to death with Molotov cocktails whilst trapped in their cars. But hey! Why let reality get in the way of a good bit of propaganda?

David All – you’re usually a very sensible sort of chap. I would expect you to realise that people living in their own homeland cannot, by definition, be colonialists. To compare Israelis to Britons in Rhodesia is ridiculously inaccurate.
It would be a good idea to remember that under the Oslo agreements, everything which goes on in Area A is under Palestinian control. As for the rest, well if Arafat had not instigated the second intefada, the agreements would have continued to be implimented and there would have been a Palestinian state by now in which they could have built any number of football stadiums.
Unfortunately, the Palestinians chose violence instead, but some people choose to continue absolving them of any responsibility whatsoever for their choices.

Are the West Bank and Gaza “occupied territories” as Palestinian Arabs assert?

As a result of the Six Day War, Israel gained all of Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Sinai, the Gaza Strip, and the West Bank (historically known as Judea and Samaria). Palestinian Arabs often insist on using the term “occupied territories” to describe these areas, usually connected to the assertion that they fall under the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention. Yet, Palestinian spokesmen also speak about Israeli military action in Area A as an invasion, an infringement on Palestinian sovereignty. The use of both forms of terminology is a contradiction. If Israel “invaded Palestinian territories” in the present, then they cannot be regarded as “occupied”; however, if the territories are defined as “occupied,” Israel cannot be “invading” them.

Israeli legal experts traditionally resisted efforts to define the West Bank and Gaza Strip as “occupied” or falling under the main international treaties dealing with military occupation. Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Meir Shamgar wrote in the 1970s that there is no de jure applicability of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention regarding occupied territories to the case of the West Bank and Gaza Strip since the Convention:

… is based on the assumption that there had been a sovereign who was ousted and that he had been a legitimate sovereign.

In fact, prior to 1967, Jordan had occupied the West Bank and Egypt had occupied the Gaza Strip; their presence in those territories was the result of their illegal invasion in 1948. Jordan’s 1950 annexation of the West Bank was recognized only by Great Britain and Pakistan and rejected by the vast majority of the international community, including the Arab states.

International jurists generally draw a distinction between situations of “aggressive conquest” and territorial disputes that arise after a war of self-defense. Former US State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, who later headed the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 regarding Israel’s case:

Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.

Israel only entered the West Bank in 1967 after repeated Jordanian artillery fire and ground movements across the previous armistice lines; additionally, Iraqi forces crossed Jordanian territory and were poised to enter the West Bank. Under such circumstances, even the United Nations rejected Soviet efforts to have Israel branded as the aggressor in the Six-Day War.

Regardless of how many times the Palestinian Arabs claim otherwise, Israel cannot be characterized as a “foreign occupier” with respect to the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Fundamental sources of international legality decide the question in Israel’s favor. The last international legal allocation of territory that includes what is today the West Bank and Gaza Strip occurred with the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine which recognized Jewish national rights in the whole of the Mandated territory, including the sector east of the Jordan River, almost 80% of the original Mandated territory, that was given to Palestinian Arabs and Emir Abdullah to create the country of Trans-Jordan (later renamed Jordan). Moreover, the rights under the Mandate were preserved under the United Nations as well, according to Article 80 of the UN Charter, after the termination of the League of Nations in 1946.

It is important to observe that, from the time these territories were conquered by Jordan, Syria and Egypt in 1948 to the time they were gained by Israel in 1967, the territories were not refered to as “occupied” by the international community. Furthermore, the people living in those territories before 1967 were not called “Palestinians” as they are today; they were called Jordanians and Egyptians. (In fact, before Israel was founded Jews and Arabs alike who lived in the region were called Palestinians. The newspaper was the “Palestine Bulletin” and later the “Palestine Post” before becoming today’s “Jerusalem Post”, the Jewish-founded electric company was “Palestine Electric” and so on.) There was no call for “liberation” or “national rights” for the Arabs living there and no Palestinian nation was discussed.

No UN resolution requires Israel to withdraw unilaterally from the territories, nor do they forbid Israelis from going there to live. In particular, the often-misquoted UN Security Council Resolution 242 (and related Resolution 338) make no such demand or requirement. The demand that Israel stop creating “illegal settlements” is similarly baseless.

Under the Oslo Accords, the “peace process” started in 1991 at the Madrid Conference, Israel agreed to withdraw from the disputed territories and Yasser Arafat’s Palestinian Authority (PA) was given control over land chosen so that more than ninety-nine percent of the Palestinian population lived under the jurisdiction of the PA. But the committment to Israel’s security that was the backbone of the Oslo agreements was never honored by the PA and Israel was forced to periodically re-enter the ceded territory to quell terrorism. In 2000, Yasser Arafat rejected sweeping concessions by Israel at Camp David — promoted by US Pres. Clinton in an attempt to reach a final peace agreement — and the Palestinian Arabs turned again to violence with the Al Aqsa Intifada. That is, after the PA was governing nearly all Palestinian Arabs and a generous peace offer with international backing was on the table, the only response Israel got was increased violence. This is the sole reason Israel continues to have a military presence in the disputed territories.

The answer as to why Israel acted as it did regarding the stadium and has undertaken numerous other similar but less publicized actions can be summed up in three words: Zionism is sadism.

Actually, reading all of this, especially Jeff’s last ridiculous comment, is masochism. As was pointed out, Amira Hass is one of the least reliable sources I can think of. Relying on Haaretz (a German newspaper which hires a few far-left Israeli writers) for information about what happens in Israel is like relying on the old Pravda for information about what happens in the U.S.

But the information from Judy about international law is interesting and useful. Thanks!

More semantics and more lawyering. The fact is that there are Palestinian Arabs living in the West Bank and their legal property is routinely confiscated for Israeli settlements. Israeli planning law is enforced over a football pitch but legal Arab land ownership is ignored when it comes to Israeli interests. The basis for occupying/invading that bit of land is no longer tenable. Encouraging Jewish families to settle in the West Bank, which was occupied on the basis that it was a security risk, is just plain insane. If you know that there are a load of Islamist lunatics eager to kill as many Jews as possible, you don’t move Jewish families next door to them unless you are being really reckless, irresponsible and arrogant.

Look, the answer is simple. Get out of the West Bank, evacuate the settlements, build a wall around Israel and put machine gun turrets on top to keep the terrorists out. You won’t have to deal with a corrupt and divided Palestinian Authority ever again, you won’t have to worry about these bloody settlements and there would be no debates about planning laws. It would also save money.

“But the information from Judy about international law is interesting and useful” Unfortunately one of the statements of law is wrong, namely:

In terms of international law, between 1948 and 1967 this territory was terra nullius, or “land belonging to no one” over which sovereignty may be acquired through occupation. The concept of terra nullius is well recognized in international law. ”

Territory inhabited by people with some sort of political or social organisation is not terra nullius. You could try and argue that the Palestinians before 1967 did not have such organisations qua Palestinians but it wouldn’t get far. It is hard to conceive of terra nullius that would satisfy the test today unless it was completely uninhabited.

A better exposition and argument is to be found in Judy’s comment of 1.50 am which departs from the earlier occupation argument, and centres more soundly, on the issue of disputed territories after a defensive war. That is not a claim of right, but is susceptible to be resolved by negotiation.

(Ironically, I studied International Law under Dugard later to become the demoniser of Israel at the UN, but in those days he still gave me a good mark for my dissertation that the 6 day war was an act of justifiable self defence under the UN Charter.).

‘Look, the answer is simple. Get out of the West Bank, evacuate the settlements, build a wall around Israel and put machine gun turrets on top to keep the terrorists out. You won’t have to deal with a corrupt and divided Palestinian Authority ever again, you won’t have to worry about these bloody settlements and there would be no debates about planning laws. It would also save money.’

Been there, done that Dan. It was called the evacuation of Gush Katif. All we got in return were 8,000 rockets, against which machine guns are not particularly effective.

The fact is that there are Palestinian Arabs living in the West Bank and their legal property is routinely confiscated for Israeli settlements.

link?

Israeli planning law is enforced over a football pitch but legal Arab land ownership is ignored when it comes to Israeli interests.

link?

Please back up your accusations which I’ve quoted above, which so far don’t appear to be grounded in anything except your self-satisfied acquiescence with markedly uninformed politicized talking points.

I even wonder whether you could back up your accusations by substantiating for me exactly which land tenure classifications, Miri, Mulk, or Mewat – land tenure classifications required of Israel to uphold by the 1907 Hague Regulations – do the lands you accuse Israel of having illegally confiscated for Jewish settlements (not unrecognized outposts) from alleged legal Arab title holders belong?

Are you even aware of the significance of Miri, Mulk and Mewat land tenure classifications to establish legal title?

.

MMN “These excuses are getting more and more bizarre.”

No! whats bizarre is the absolute conviction you hold on this issue, based entirely on partisan reports/analysis and hearsay. Whats also bizarre is you can assert the construction is three years old and when it is pointed out that in any significant sense it cant be you simply shift to the construction starting with the ceremonial stone laying 13 months ago………………you do understand that a ceremonial stone laying isnt actually practically relevent to construction?

Also Bizarre is the fact that you clearly dont percieve, this ‘international event’ in and of itself to be a fairly obvious motivation for the Israelis to drag their feet and delay flexing their muscles.

“Ehhh ? Are you sure ?”

NO! of course i’m not, thats why it was a ‘guess’. Fact is its bizarre that you are so sure, seemingly on the basis of the same evidence i’ve seen. I can understand on a number of levels why the palestinians would be disinclined to cooperate with the Israelis re planning permission, it would be bizarre or dishonest if I couldnt. Your refusal to acknowledge any rational reason (other than the insidious) for an israeli administration to seek to ‘administrate’, to, act, to delay acting, or even to choose not to act, and your decision to then percieve all as evidence of the insidious is either bizarre or evidence that the honest and nuetral observer mantle you appear to claim is an utter facade.

You keep saying the Israelis have allowed this, so if there is permision that isnt 28 years old where is it, why do you keep infering as fact whatever you choose?

“at the time there were no Israeli objections” – you have no evidence of this, you have no idea when the israelis made contact, what if any contact or partial application the palestinians made. All you know is that 13 months ago the israelis didnt charge in and tell some Fifa bigwig “lay that stone and we shoot”

“Al-Bireh municipality, which owns the land and within whose jurisdiction the stadium is located.” – again you present it as fact in spite of the dispute itself being irefutable evidence that this is a matter of public dispute on at least some level.

The Palestinian narrative on this may well be 90% accurate (I doubt it, but it might be) you however dont have sufficient evidence to justify being wedded to that notion and arent even interested in properly analysing the evidence you do have, thats bizarre and bizarrely common.

“Why should the Palestinians go through this pathetic rigmarole” – I could give you a number of answers, some of them begining ‘they shouldnt, because….’ but i’m not sure I could come up with one exclusive righteous truth of an answer, but clearly you already have.

“your self-satisfied acquiescence with markedly uninformed politicized talking points.”

Yawn.

“Are you even aware of the significance of Miri, Mulk and Mewat land tenure classifications to establish legal title?”

I don’t care, frankly, just as you don’t care about Arab land titles in East Jerusalem. There is an easy way out. Give up the West Bank and quit the settlements. But just as nationalism can be a force for liberation, it can also be chauvinistic and arrogant. Defending a sovereign homeland for the Jewish people who have been systematically persecuted, often with extreme violence, in Arab and European countries is something I fully support. That is Zionist liberation from oppression. The continued occupation of the West and the treatment of the inhabitants is the nasty side of Zionism, just as terrorism and Islamic chauvinism is the nasty side of Palestinian nationalism. Recognise it and deal with it instead of attempting to create a patchwork of walled settlements and bantustans based on selective interpretations of the law.

bos – fine we’ll see what happens, I’m quoting from an article in Haaretz, you’re casting aspersions on it saying it may be inaccurate but can’t prove it in any way. Not much scope for rational debate there.

Dan – good stuff, the hypocrisy of the Israeli extremists is nauseating. Anyone who supports the continued building of Israeli settlements in the West Bank while jumping to the defence of incompetent pettiness by Israel wrt peaceful Palestinian development is contemptible.

The continued settlement of the West Bank is indefensible, I don’t how many of the Israel defenders above support it but if you do you should be aware how counter productive it is to most of those in the West who generally support Israel.

I don’t care, frankly, just as you don’t care about Arab land titles in East Jerusalem.

On what do you base your accusation that I don’t care about Arab land titles in East Jerusalem, Dan? And which Arab land titles in East Jerusalem are you referring to?

Finally, since you state that you frankly don’t care about legal land tenure classifications, it is hard not to conclude that your opinions are nothing more than uninformed politicized claptrap masquerading as legalistic factoids.

It is apparently pointless and an utter waste of time to expect to learn anything from you Dan except that you’re apparently unwilling, or unable to back up your accusations that I’ve asked you to substantiate with actual evidence, as opposed to smug and uninformed opinioneering.

But here’s something you can learn about my actual thinking on the matter of Jewish settlements in the West Bank or East Jerusalem: I strongly oppose any illegal confiscation of land either by private individuals, consortiums, or the State of Israel that is or was legally titled to Arab land holders.

Second, and as opposed to your smug and ill-considered demands for a unilateral Israeli retreat from all lands outside of the 1949 armistice lines (Hey Dan, who according to you gets sovereignty over the Holy Basin in Jerusalem? And as opposed to the negotiated bilateral treaties between Israel and Egypt and Israel and Jordan, how have the non-negotiated, unilateral Israeli retreats that you demand, worked out in terms of achieving peace for Palestinians and Israelis so far? Dan?), I desire a negotiated, binding, comprehensive and equitable peace settlement between the State of Israel and the Palestinian political institution most representative of the Palestinian population to settle all outstanding issues.

MMN: I’ve seen the same kind of arguments over who owns what from the Arab side. The arguments over who owns this or that acre of land could go on indefinitely. But where there is a will, there is a way. Neither side has a will to end this conflict. If they were honest, they would admit this. Why on earth should the rest of the world have any patience for it when there are other concerns that need urgent resolution? Don’t you think that if the same amount of energy was put into Darfur, a hell of a lot of lives would be saved? A hell of a lot of effort went into the Oslo Accords of 1993 which got nowhere. In the following year, Burundi and Rwanda were plunged into a genocidal civil war that spilled over into the Congo and the international community did not lift a finger to stop it. No, the words “peace process” must only apply to Arabs and Jews. Is anyone as bored as I am with this farcical conflict?

Here’s a peace proposal reported on by Ha’aretz’s Bradley Burston that self-righteous and increasingly enraged pontificators MMN and Dan would evidently oppose as -to put it in MMN’s words – “the hypocrisy of nauseating Israeli extremists”:

Ray Hanania is a compassionate and, in fact, delightful person, with rare insight into the aspirations and failings of Palestinians and Israelis. In the eyes of many, that alone ought to disqualify him from consideration as a leader in the Holy Land.

Add to that, the fact that the acclaimed journalist also happens to be a first-generation Palestinian-American married to a Jewish woman, as well as a stand-up comedian who has appeared alongside Jewish comics, and the self-destructively polarized electorate of the Holy Land will need to expend not a whiff of thought in dismissing him out of hand.

Which all makes his candidacy for the president of Palestine, and the Mideast peace proposal that is his platform, all the more compelling. He is realistic about his chances (“No, I don’t expect to win”). But the Hanania plan embodies the radicalism of the truly moderate, and deserves much more than cursory consideration.

Consider his proposal for one of the thorniest municipal quandaries in the West Bank. Jews who wish to live in Hebron in a future state of Palestine, should be allowed to do so, he writes, “and should be protected, just as non-Jews. In fact, for every Jewish individual seeking to live in Palestine, a Palestinian should be permitted to live in Israel.”

What Hanania is proposing is a two state solution that addresses not only quantifiable issues, but underlying emotional grievances, and the anguish in the histories of both sides. Cynics, and, in particular, the extremists among them, will reject it out of hand as simplistic and artificially balanced. But if peace is ever to be made in the Holy Land, it will be made despite extremists and not by them.

The following is the text of Hanania’s outline. I have taken the liberty of numbering the clauses, with an eye toward facilitating discussion:

1. I support two-states, one Israel and one Palestine. As far as I am concerned, I can recognize Israel’s “Jewish” character and Israelis should recognize Palestine’s “non-Jewish” character.

2. I oppose violence of any kind from and by anyone. I reject Hamas’ participation in any Palestinian government without first agreeing to surrender all arms and to accept two-states as a “final” peace agreement. But I also reject allowing Israeli settlers to carry any weapons and believe Israelis must impose the same restrictions on them.

3. I can support some settlements remaining – given the reality of 42 years of time passing – in a dunam-for-dunam land exchange. If Ariel is 500 dunams with a lifeline from Israel, then Israel gives Palestine 500 dunams in exchange.

4. Jerusalem should be a shared city and Palestinians should have an official presence in East Jerusalem. The Old City should be shared by both permitting open access to the city to all with a joint Palestinian-Israeli police presence.

5. Palestinian refugees would give up their demand to return to pre-1948 homes and lands lost during the conflict with Israel. Instead, some could apply for family reunification through Israel and the remainder would be compensated through a fund created and maintained by the United States, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the United Nations.

6. I also think Israelis should find it in their hearts to show compassion and offer their apologies to Palestinians for the conflict.

7. I support creation of a similar fund to compensate those Jews from Arab lands who lost their homes and lands, too, when they fled.

8. I think the Wall should be torn down, or relocated to the new borders. I have no problem separating the two nations for a short duration to help rebuild confidence between our two people.

9. All political parties, Palestinian and Israelis, should eliminate languages denying each other’s existence, and all maps should be reprinted so that Israeli maps finally show Palestine and Palestinian maps finally show Israel.

10. A subway system should be built linking the West Bank portion of the Palestine state to the Gaza Strip portion of the Palestine State. Palestine should be permitted to build a seaport access to strengthen its industry, and an airport to permit flights and too and from the Arab and Israeli world.

11. I would urge the Arab World to renew their offer to normalize relations with Israel if Israel agrees to support the creation of a Palestinian State.

12. And I would ask both countries to establish embassies in each other’s country to address other problems.

13. While non-Jewish Palestinians would continue to live in Israel as citizens, Jews who wish to live in settlements surrendered by Israel could become Palestinian citizens and they should be recognized and treated equally.

14. If Jews want to live in Hebron, they should be allowed to live in Hebron and should be protected, just as non-Jews. In fact, for every Jewish individual seeking to live in Palestine, a Palestinian should be permitted to live in Israel. In fact, major Palestinian populations in Israel could be annexed into Palestine (like settlements).

15. Another concept is to have non-Jews living in Israel continue to live there but only vote in Palestinian elections, while Jews living in Palestine would only vote in Israeli elections. A special citizenship protection committee could be created to explore how to protect the rights of minorities in each state.

16. Israel and Palestine should create joint-governing and security agencies working with the United States to monitor the peace, and establish an agency to pursue criminal acts of violence.

As in every potentially workable peace proposal, Hanania’s plan has something in it to upset and disappoint everyone. But its underlying principle of compromise based on mutual respect and compassion, its openness to the needs and wounds of two victimized peoples, and its suggestion that grassroots sentiment for peace can succeed where leaders have so consistently failed, are surely as worthy of serious consideration, as anything currently on the table.

Yes, I broadly support all those aims since they are what any peace settlement would look like, although I have no faith in either the Israeli state or the Palestinian Authority ever coming to such an agreement. The land-for-land exchange could be tedious and counter-productive, particularly if it ends up with a bizarre international border resembling something like this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/Palestine_Map_2007_(Settlements).gif I just don’t have any faith in either side’s commitment to peace. I think they want to see more dead bodies to settle historical scores and they are prepared to sacrifice the lives of their own young people to do this.

lbnaz : this peace plan you put forward says settlements should only stay by agreement with the PA :

“3. I can support some settlements remaining – given the reality of 42 years of time passing – in a dunam-for-dunam land exchange. If Ariel is 500 dunams with a lifeline from Israel, then Israel gives Palestine 500 dunams in exchange.”

I assume the land Israel would give Palestine would be of a similar quality from inside Israel ?

If so fine – most settlements will go, the ones that remain will be only with agreement with the PA in exchange for Israeli land. I agree.

Is this a solution you think most settlers would agree to ?

This is not an extremist plan and was not what I am criticising. You need to calm down.

“Don’t you think that if the same amount of energy was put into Darfur, a hell of a lot of lives would be saved? A hell of a lot of effort went into the Oslo Accords of 1993 which got nowhere. In the following year, Burundi and Rwanda were plunged into a genocidal civil war”

Dan: How extraordinary that you appear to blame the I/P conflict for diverting precious energy and attention to these other conflicts. Right, but for the selfish protagonists of the I/P conflict greedily soaking up the world’s energy, the world would have solved the other conflicts long ago!

The world focuses disproportionate attention on I/P because that is what is chooses to focus on, driven by all kinds of considerations, Arab oil, singling out of Israel for all the ancient reasons, etc etc. And for all kinds of other considerations, the world is not moved, with some exceptions, to bring to account the perpetrators of African atrocities. None of which has to do with the bizarre kind of energy rationing you depict.

lbnaz : this peace plan you put forward says settlements should only stay by agreement with the PA

First allow me to disabuse you of your erroneous assumption MMN, it wasn’t me, but rather Dan who was calling for non-negotiated unilateral Israeli withdrawals.

And allow me again, if you will to disabuse you of some of your other assumptions as indicated by your comment that “The continued settlement of the West Bank is indefensible, I don’t how many of the Israel defenders above support it…”:

1. The dreaded Binyamin Netanyahu is clearly following Israeli policy initiated during Ariel Sharon’s administration and which has continued throughout Olmert’s administration that no new settlements will be built or authorized by the State of Israel.

2. The settlements and Jerusalem suburbs located over the 1949 armistice lines in which construction is taking place are those that are most likely to remain under Israeli sovereignty following a negotiated peace settlement and compensation of a dunam for dunam exchange of land of similar quality.

3. The most intractable issues which have so far proscribed a negotiated bilateral comprehensive final and equitable peace settlement between the two parties aren’t the issues regarding equitable land swaps and the future jurisdictional status of large Jewish settlements or Jerusalem suburbs over the 1949 Armistice lines, for which Palestinian and Israeli negotiators have already been able to attain consensus, but rather the refugees issue and the status of the so-called Holy Basin in Jerusalem.

although I have no faith in either the Israeli state or the Palestinian Authority ever coming to such an agreement

That’s OK Dan, I have no faith whatsoever given your comments on this thread that you have the foggiest notion of what you’re talking about.

The most intractable issues.. the refugees issue and the status of the so-called Holy Basin in Jerusalem. Quite, Lbnaz. People, whether well meaning like Dan and those with more animus towards Israel, have a reflexive impulse about all this unpleasantness to say ” make it all go away, just make it stop,” and see the settlements as the magic way to make it all stop. I know, Dan you will say the settlements are just making it worse, necessary but not sufficient- but it does get obsessed about, and reduced, by you as well, to the magic bullet.

“The most intractable issues.. the refugees issue and the status of the so-called Holy Basin in Jerusalem.”

Some political realities: the refugees won’t return, the Israeli state is a permanent fixture in the Middle East, no-one has a divine right over anyone else’s land, Jerusalem will remain a city for people of different faiths and ethnicities, the temple won’t be rebuilt and the Palestinian Arabs will not move away or give up their aspirations for a sovereign state. Regardless of the rights and wrongs, that’s the reality. A peace settlement needs to be based on politically feasible solutions. I just don’t think there are enough people on either side who accept these realities to make the situation move forward and the involvement of states that have no reason to be involved – in particular, Iran, which has no business to be dabbling in the Lebanon and the Palestinian territories (or Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq and other places) – just creates more mistrust. I can’t see why a peace settlement cannot be reached within a year if there was a genuine interest in it.

Israelinurse: I was comparing Israeli settlers on the West Bank beyond the barrier wall only to the British settlers in Rhodesia and the French settlers in Algeria, not Israelis in general. The Israeli settlers in that part of the West Bank are and, barring some Cromwellian to-Hell-or-Connaught-type mass deportation of Palestinians to Jordan, will remain a minority admist a disgrunted and hostile majority just as the British settlers in Rhodesia were.

Proclaiming that Israel has some sort of right to the West Bank because of this or that ignores the fact that the Palestinian majority does not recognize Israel’s right to do so. The Palestinians will no more become Israelis if Israel were to annex the West Bank than the Act of Union in 1800 making Ireland a part of the United Kingdom made the Irish Catholic majority into loyal subjects of the British crown or the French proclamation that Algeria was as much a part of France as Normandy made the Muslim majority there into Frenchmen.

Lbnaz: Hanania’s proposals are very sensible. It is a pity that they are unlikely to be adopated any time soon.

There more on this at my blog :

http://moremedianonsense.blogspot.com/2009/11/more-on-ramallah-stadium-looks-like.html

Basically the nearby settlement want the stadium stopped from security fears.