Take action by actively taking a stand in supporting boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) targeting Israel's military occupation.
For More Information, contact info@cjpsandiego.org
Frequently Asked Questions about Palestine |
(Go to Chronology of Palestine Issue >>) |
Are Israeli settlements legal under International Law?Under article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention, Israel is prohibited from establishing settlements as follows: "The Occupying Power shall not transfer parts of its own civilian population into territories it occupies." Israel has violated this law since 1967 by creating settlements exclusively for Jews in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. The total number of illegal Jewish settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is about 440,000. Are expulsions of Palestinians legal under international law?Under Articles 35 & 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention, it is forbidden to deport or "forcibly transfer" the local population, including such common Israeli practices as revoking the Jerusalem residency of Palestinians and banning Palestinians from returning from work, study or travel abroad. How much land is owned by Palestinians in the West Bank?Since 1967, Israel has declared 73% of the West Bank "state lands," thus annulling Palestinian deeds going back generations. This sets the stage for massive expropriations of Palestinian land for settlements, military facilities, highways and by-pass roads, industrial areas, closed military areas, and nature reserves. Didn't Israel's proposal at Camp David in 2000 give the Palestinians almost all of the territories occupied by Israel in 1967?No. Israel sought to annex almost 9% of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, which constitutes 23% of historic Palestine, and in exchange offered only 1% of Israel's own territory. In addition, Israel sought control over an additional 10% of the Occupied Palestinian Territories in the form of a "long-term lease". The territory over which Israel insisted on maintaining control would have made the proposed Palestinian state non-contiguous, sort of like Swiss cheese, with Israel controlling all access from one piece to the next. Thus, the issue is not one of percentages - the issue is one of viability and independence. In a prison for example, 95% of the prison compound is ostensibly for the prisoners - cells, cafeterias, gym and medical facilities - but the remaining 5% is all that is needed for the prison guards to maintain control over the prisoner population. Similarly, the Camp David proposal, while admittedly making Palestinian prison cells larger, failed to end Israeli control over the Palestinian population. Why did the Palestinians reject the Camp David Peace Proposal?For a true and lasting peace between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, there must be true equality and justice for all. Israel's proposal divided the proposed Palestinian state into four separate cantons: the Northern West Bank, the Central West Bank, the Southern West Bank and Gaza. Going from any one area to another would require crossing Israeli sovereign territory and consequently subject movement of Palestinians within their own country to Israeli control. Not only would such restrictions apply to the movement of people, but also to the movement of goods, in effect subjecting the Palestinian economy to Israeli control. Lastly, the Camp David proposal would have left Israel in control over all Palestinian borders thereby allowing Israel to control not only internal movement of people and goods but international movement as well. Such a Palestinian state would have had less sovereignty and viability than the Bantustans created by the South African apartheid government. Just like the South African people rejected the Bantustans proposed by the Apartheid government in the 80’s and instead insisted on full equality, the Palestinians rejected the unfair Camp David proposals and insisted on complete freedom from foreign domination. Accepting the Camp David proposal would have been tantamount to accepting their subjugation by a foreign power; no free people would accept that. How did Israel's proposal address Palestinian East Jerusalem?The Camp David Proposal required Palestinians to give up any claim to Jerusalem. The proposal would have forced recognition of Israel's annexation of all of Arab East Jerusalem. Talks after Camp David suggested that Israel was prepared to allow Palestinians sovereignty over isolated Palestinian neighborhoods in the heart of East Jerusalem; however, such neighborhoods would remain surrounded by illegal Israeli colonies and separated not only from each other but also from the rest of the Palestinian state. In effect, such a proposal would create Palestinian ghettos in the heart of Jerusalem. Did the lives of the Palestinians improve during the Oslo process?During the Oslo negotiations, a permanent closure was imposed on the Occupied Territories. This complete closure had little to do with security. Indeed, during the previous 26 years of occupation, including the first Intifada, there was no closure. Since 1993 Palestinians have been locked out of work and as a result have become impoverished, while Israel has imported hundreds of thousands of cheaper foreign workers. By 2002, the average Palestinian family earned only an eighth of what it had earned when the peace process began in 1993. How much land was transferred to Palestinian control during the Oslo Process?During the seven years of the Oslo negotiations, the Palestinian Authority achieved control of only 18% of the West Bank and 60% of Gaza – far from the idea of two states on which Oslo was based. Did Israel stop building settlements after the Oslo Agreements?During the Oslo negotiations, the settler population doubled. Thirty new settlements were established, including entire cities such as Kiryat Sefer and Tel Zion. All this prejudiced the successful outcome of the negotiations from the start. Did Israel stop expropriating land after the Oslo Agreements?During the Oslo negotiations, when the status of the Occupied Territories was supposedly being negotiated, Israel expropriated 200 square kilometers of farm and pasture land for its own exclusive settlements and infrastructure. Isn't it unreasonable for the Palestinians to demand the unlimited right of return to Israel of all Palestinian refugees?There can be no comprehensive solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict without resolving one of its key components: the plight of the Palestinian refugees. There is a clearly recognized right under international law that non-combatants who flee during a conflict have the right to return after the conflict is over. An Israeli recognition of its responsibility in creating the Palestine refugee problem and the Palestinian right of return are both morally necessary and historically a pre-requisite for true reconciliation in Palestine. Israeli claims that if Palestinian refugees, who number 4 million, return to their homes then Israel will not be able to survive as a Jewish state is tantamount to saying that if South Africa had given the majority black population equal rights then it would cease to exist as a White racist state. The right of Israeli Jews to live in the land of historic Palestine should never be at the expense of the indigenous Palestinian population.
Go to Facts >> |