Al Jazeera recently produced this interesting report on Palestinians trying to move into Israeli settlements in Jerusalem:
It’s interesting that Israel’s massive restrictions over Palestinians in Jerusalem is forcing them to find the loophole, which in this case is moving into the settlements. The story seems to confirm what Ron Kampeas wrote about yesterday for the JTA – by avoiding the two-state solution, Israel could get one state.
Taking back arab land, one home at a time, by hard-to-get sale from an Israeli Jew, runs into the problem of arab fighting arab in the long run over title to the land. On the other hand, what choice do the Palestinians have?
Having "mixed" towns and settlements could be the best thing to happen to this country. One of the biggest things that plagues Israel is that instead of being a cohesive nation-state, it's a network of only-sometimes-overlapping homogenous ethno-religious / tribal bubbles. I live in one such homogenous Israeli city (I think we are 100%), and I think the healthiest thing that could happen here is a bit of heterogeneity. Mix it up. I can't imagine that the emergent political landscape wouldn't be healthier all around…
I'm gonna put this clip on my own blog under the headline, "one state or bust".
Well, let's be honest. It's already one state. Task now is to face up to the fact and deal with it honestly. Even if you call it two states, it's really just one state with some kind of federalist veneer.
Rowan, this may be the answer to your question somewhere else: http://blog.intensedebate.com/2009/04/ or at least a partial answer.
Sure, Ruth. Hey, when a Palestinian family moves into your city, you run right over and make friends with them. Even better, date or marry on of the guys (if he is a suitable husband, of course, for a nice girl with ideals like you) Then write us back and tell us how much support you get from the Jewish community. It's funny, but I get the feeling that there is another Israel, (one hidden from most Americans or even American Jews, ) full of people who want to live, and live with the people there, even if it involves making changes or sacrifices. The Zionist elite, the Israeli government is terrified of letting us see these people, but I think they are there. You seem to think so, too. That is wonderful.
Bravo. Finally a voice of sanity. Two state is a pipe dream that will only lead to future problems. The future is one state, democratic (to ALL), inclusive, peaceful without the apartheid rules now in palce.
If there is no restriction to ownership, no restriction to work, and no personal threat, then what is the issue? Isn't that by definition, democracy.
The neighborhood mentioned and pictured in this video is a suburb of Jerusalem. It is dishonestly described by alJazeera as a "settlement". If Jews live there, then it is an "illegal settlement". If Muslims live in the very same home then it is called a Palestinean neighborhood. But wait! When talking about houses on the OTHER SIDE of the Green Line, if Jews live there, they are called Zionists in a settlement but if Muslims live there, they are called Palestineans in a village. The forked toungue of the bigot!!! Quoting alJazeera doesn't improve your credibilty.. :-) (Did you notice that the Jewish homes are crowded apartments? Arabs in Israel mostly live in expansive houses. Why doesn't alJazeera show this? I wonder.. do you???)
The comments to that thread are interesting. Someone called Jon explains that part of the problem with comments is that IntenseDebate has to "run them through our filters." What can this mean?
Arabs in Israel mostly live in expansive houses. Ahem. I don't think this needs rebuttal. It is one of those incredibly stupid remarks zionists seem to be making more and more often these recent days.
Mooser, you ever been here? Do you know where Ruth lives? And why are you so obsessed with dating and marriage? BTW, did you ever consider what would happen to a Muslim girl who dated and married a Jewish guy?
Well Rowan, Israeli Arabs tend to build large homes for their extended families. Israeli Jews tend to buy apartments in multi-story, high-rise apartments. That's a fact.
Israeli Arabs tend to build large homes? Where?
The settlement mentioned in the Al Jazeera video is Pisgat Zeev. It is built on part of the land illegally annexed by Israel when it annexed East Jerusalem and a large chunk of West Bank land surrounding it. It is illegal because the acquisition of land by military force is illegal under international law and it is therefore called a "settlement" . (And Pisgat Zeev is NOT on the Israeli side of the green line, so the rest of your statement makes no sense. Tel Aviv is not called a settlement, and neither is Haifa or Be'er Sheva or any other Israeli city.) I don't think that you are in Jerusalem after all, or you wouldn't make such a silly statement about Israeli Arabs living in "expansive houses". Israeli Arabs, especially in Jerusalem, have great difficulty getting building permits for new houses, and are often restricted from building anything new at all on their own land, so they often add on, sans the impossible-to-get building permits, and are forced to live with their extended families all in one building because Israel makes it difficult to do otherwise. If you lived in any of those homes with multiple families living in them you wouldn't be so foolish as to call them "expansive". Most Jews have more room in their "crowded apartments" than many Israeli Arabs have in their shared "expansive houses". Israel doesn't build many "expansive houses" for Jewish Israelis in East Jerusalem because they are interested in cramming as many Jews into East Jerusalem as possible, and expansive homes don't let them do that. If you've got a problem with that, take it up with the Israeli government and the Jerusalem municipality.
Actually, it would be more accurate to say that Israeli Arabs tend to have already had homes that were either large to begin with or that they have been forced to expand over time to accommodate their large extended families because of Israeli insistence on focusing on building more housing for Jews and ignoring or discouraging building new houses for Israeli Arabs, and many Arab communities in Israel have suffered net losses in land expropriated by the state for the building of Jewish-only communities. This has resulted in a shortage of housing for Israeli Arabs, and paradoxically an increase in the value of the original Arab homes. Anyone seriously interested in a discussion of this Israeli phenomenon should read "Overlooking Nazareth: The Ethnography of Exclusion in Galilee (Cambridge Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology) " by Dan Rabinowitz or "Ethnocracy: Land and Identity Politics in Israel/Palestine" by Oren Yiftachel.
Good for you! That idea wouldn't begin to solve all the problems, but as you say it would be a healthy start. Out of idle curiosity–do Israeli jews normally have any Israeli arab friends, fellow students, workmates, etc.? Do they socialize together at all? You know, get together at the local bar to watch soccer matches? What about young people in Tel Aviv?
BUYING HOMES IN settlements is obsurd. It is only a matter of time before the taliban settlers murder them. And why is the "beloved" abasshole not doing anything but kissing major aparthied ass?
Oh, let's see, in Umm el-Fahm, in Jaljuliya, in Kfar Qassem, in Taibeh, in Talbiyeh, in Furadis… In short in towns and villages all over Israel. I live here. You don't. Every time I travel, I see tons of new construction in these places.
Tree, I'm sure that there is an element of what you say involved, although if you look at other places in the Middle East, as they tend to become urbanized, Arab families tend to build, and live in multi-level homes. But the fault is not one sided. The local councils running Arab towns do not like to charge taxes because their residents don't like to pay taxes. They also have a tendency to distribute money that they receive from the Ministry of the Interior for local development to the dominant clans in the towns. Further, they hold up the approval of Planning Commission urban plans, because these specify, among other things, that there should be areas held over for public use, such as parks and playgrounds, which would require them to confiscate – by eminent domain – land from familes for these purposes. Given that the social structure of the Arab, and particularly Muslim culture, is based so heavily on the inheretance of land, I can see why the anthropologists might see this as important and quaint (and, most important, represents job security of a sort). However, we do live in the 21st century. Most of these villagers would not participate in agriculture, even if there weren't a single Jew here, because there simply would not be enough land and the land that was available would simply be too fragmented due to these aniquated social behaviors.
Thank you al-Jazeera for putting an end to the lie about Arabs not being able to purchase apartments built on State Land!
Tree, "expansive" is a relative term. It's good that you brought up Jerusalem, because there the demographics are more similar than say Haifa or Tel Aviv, because there are a lot of Muslim Arabs and a lot of haredi Jews. They have two things in common: poverty and large families. There is a correlation between not practicing birth control and living in low income, crowded dwellings. BTW, I don't think that "settlement" is a legal term. It's purposely meant to be emotive. Also, the legality or illegality of the settlements such as Pisgat Ze'ev is not based on the fact that the territory that they are built on was annexed or even that it was acquired by force. I believe that it is based on the argument (mistaken, in my opinion) that such settlements are in violation of Article 49, paragraph 6 of the IVth Geneva Convention. You might want to have a look here for a legal opinon by an expert in international law: http://www.aijac.org.au/resources/reports/interna...
The people who live there call them settlements: cue the Women in Green. "We proclaim that we are partners with the settlement enterprise to proudly settle and protect the Holy Land, the Land of our Ancestors, in Judea and Samaria and throughout the entire Promised Land and do not reject our Biblical birthright – our precious gift from G-d." Are you doing PR for them, JES49; seems you arrived right after the hoopla raised by that intemperate rant that still is echoing throughout the world. They've cleaned up their web site, is why I ask. The wordage seems familiar.
http://womeningreen.org/?p=239
Yes it sounds good and democratic now, but you know as well as anyone that it's far from the truth.. However, it just seems the Zionists are asleep at the switch for the moment……. Those Palestinian purchases must have slipped by under the radar.. Zionists at present, are too busy to notice the trend…they're too involved with keeping the Iran scare alive, which of course mean their whole economy, delegitimizing speech, forcing loyalty oaths, along with settlement expansions and managing the US at the same time to really take notice…But they will… TATA
I don't know Edithann. Perhaps you missed this story: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1081813.html I don't think that the purchases "slipped under the radar", as you say. The first one was ten years ago, according to the report. The "loyalty oath" thing is only since the last election (and I can guarantee that the punishment isn't death by hanging!). No, Edithann, I think that al-Jazerra really screwed the pooch on this one. Either Palestinians can or they cannot by apartments built on State Land and administered by the Israel Lands Authority. You can't have it both ways!
Margaret, sorry to inform you that the, no, I am not doing PR for them. I do not support them and I have been against the settlers and settlement policy since 1968, for a variety of reasons, but legality is not one of them. Only difference between me and you, is that, by living here, I am a stake holder. Presumably, you are not. Further, I did not say that the term is not what the settlers call where they live. I said that the term settlement is not a legal term it is a term used for its emotive value on both sides. Are you doing PR for Hamas and Hizballah? Good night now and God bless.
or if a jewish girl marries a moslem guy? Both ideas are loudicrous and challenge reality as we know it. But hey, maybe that's what we need in a land that is supposed to be where all people and reliogions come together.