by Peter A. Belmont / 2009-10-15
© 2009 Peter Belmont

RSS Recent Essays (All Topics)   •(12/23) How did we get to October 7th? •(11/23) Our Political Habits Are Ending The Human Race •(10/23) Sketch of Israel-Palestine History •(10/23) Whoever controls the discourse controls emotional reactions to reality •(08/23) Russia On Trial •(01/23) The Purpose of "Conservatism" •(10/22) The project of returning the earth to the cockroaches couldn't be in better hands! •(05/22) Abortion, The Constitution, And The Supreme Court •(03/22) The Problem of Climate Change Framing or Discourse or Understanding •(06/21) Israel-Palestine: If not apartheid, then what? The US will probably be involved in paying for the building of housing in Israel for settlers returning to pre-1967 Israel from their (illegal) settlements. Let’s discuss how this might happen. I propose a carrot which is also a stick.

As the International Court of Justice has confirmed (9 July 2004 advisory opinion), within territories occupied by Israel in June 1967, all of Israel’s settlements are illegal. The clear implication is that the settlers should be returned to pre-1967 Israel. The court made it even more clear that Israel’s “separation wall”—where it is built in occupied territories—is illegal and must be removed.

Assuming against much past practice that the US ever actively agrees with the court, the question will arise what role the US should play in providing new housing (within pre-1967 Israel) for the returning settlers.

Here’s what President Obama said about this on Christmas Day, 2009 (Don’t I wish, and recall when this article was written!):

”My fellow Americans, Palestinians, Syrians, Israelis, and the world. Greetings on this Holy Day! As you know, I have been trying to find a way to ease the Israeli/Palestinian conflict toward peace. The settlements and settlers and Israel’s separation wall in the occupied West Bank have come to seem a major part of Israel’s inability to find its way toward peace.

Yesterday I told Israel’s ambassador that the US will no longer be satisfied with merely asking Israel to “freeze” settlements in occupied territories. I told the ambassador that the US now demands that Israel remove all the settlers from all territories occupied by Israel in June 1967. I reminded the ambassador that that demand embraces the settlers residing in occupied East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, even though some Israelis claim that Israel has annexed these areas. I made it clear to the ambassador that all of the settlers and the entire wall must be removed from occupied territories by Christmas Day, 2010, one year from today.

I then mentioned that I would ask the US Congress to authorize payment of $100,000 (the total not to exceed $10B) to each settler family-unit to defray costs of resettlement in pre-1967 Israel, but only upon upon the following provisions.

In order for a family-unit to be entitled to such payment, several conditions will need to be met.

[1] Israel must publicly forbid and prevent all construction of new building (including additions to and expansions of existing housing) intended for Israeli use in occupied territories (temporary building solely for use of armed forces present in occupied territories as such excepted), in perpetuity. Israel must publish a schedule calling for and showing the steady, even, and continuous removal of settlers and emptying of settlements of Israeli settlers, and for the removal of the “separation wall”, to be fully accomplished by Christmas Day, 2010.

[2] The family-unit seeking the $100,000 payment must show that they have removed themselves from the occupied territories and have returned to pre-1967 Israeli territory on or before the time scheduled on Israel’s published schedule for their return to Israel. The housing they leave behind must be in good and clean condition and the family-unit must assign all its rights to the housing-unit to the Palestinian Authority or the Government of Syria, as appropriate.

[3] The family-unit must show that after removing from the occupied territories each member of the family unit has thereafter resided continuously within pre-1967 Israel for a period of one year. No payment will be made to any such family unless each member of that family is a citizen of Israel and unless, at the time of the request for payment, any member of that family who is a citizen of the US has formally renounced such US citizenship.

[4] The entire settlement of which the family’s housing was a part must have been evacuated of Israeli settlers before any family-unit from such settlement may receive these funds. Furthermore, Israel must publicly have given permission to the Palestinian Authority or the Government of Syria, as appropriate, to use the housing thus turned over free of present or any future restriction or interference or use from or by Israel.

[5] On or before Christmas day, 2010, Israel must have made every road within occupied territory which connects to such settlement available for use by Palestinians or Syrians, as appropriate, free of present or future restriction or interference or use (other than by armed forces present in occupied territories as such), irrespective of any other use made of such highways.

[6] No payment shall be made under this offer after the $10B allocated for it has been paid or payment promised. Payments will be made to applicants in the order of their application if such application contains an affidavit that the family unit itself has complied with [2] and [3] of these rules. This creates an incentive for family-units to return to Israel ahead of the schedule published by Israel.

[7] Subject to item [6] above, when all of these conditions have been met, the $100,000 will be paid by the US to the family-unit.


Irrespective of whether any of this $10B is ever paid out according to the terms set forth above, the US’s demand that Israel remove settlers and wall by Christmas Day, 2010, remains.

I will remind the American people that the US bears heavy responsibility for the repression of Palestinians and Syrians by Israel during the occupations which began in June 1967. The US should provide housing to Palestinians and Syrians whose homes have been destroyed by Israel and those who have been denied permission to build new housing. These payments of $100,000 may be viewed as a form of transfer payment by which the US eases the transfer of Israeli settlers back to pre-1967 Israel and at the same time eases the housing problems of Palestinians and Syrians still living under occupation or hoping to return to presently occupied territories. This system of payments may ease but will not extinguish the US’s burden of responsibility for the repression of Palestinians and Syrians by Israel during the occupations which began in June 1967.

It is my earnest hope that the occupations of Syria’s Golan Heights and of the Palestinians’ Gaza and West Bank will soon end with peace treaties in place creating a Palestinian State and rectifying and making permanent the boundaries of Israel, Syria, and the new Palestinian State.

However, even if peace prove elusive, as it well may and as it has done for 42 years already, I am determined that Israel shall comply with international humanitarian law in the conduct of its occupations.

In particular, I am determined that Israeli settlers shall no longer continue, as they have for many years, to reside in occupied territories illegally. International law makes all such settlement illegal, under all circumstances. Since the International Court of Justice has advised that Israel’s separation wall is present illegally where present in the occupied territories, I am also determined that Israel shall remove that wall and, if it so desire, rebuild it within its own pre-1967 territory.

Israel’s security is, of course, a matter of importance to me and to many Americans. After inquiry, I am persuaded that Israel’s violations of international law have not made Israel safer or more secure. Thus, in calling for a return to legality, I am if anything calling for a stronger and more secure Israel that at present, and I am not threatening Israel’s security.

But even if it could be shown that in some marginal and negligible manner Israel’s settlements or wall—in occupied territory—have made Israel more secure than it would be if both settlers and wall were moved to Israel’s pre-1967 territory, I would still call for their removal. Minimal and probably illusory gains in security do not excuse major violations of law.

I hereby undertake a very dramatic change in US policy, a change which will doubtless be resisted in America by those who, in what may be called a “my country, right or wrong” manner, favor Israel in whatever that country does, and who are unconcerned either with the human rights of Palestinians and Syrians living under occupation—or seeking to return to their homes there --or with questions of Israeli compliance with international law.

For those people, and especially for members of the US Congress who have entertained such views, I have a single question, and such people should not be heard to object to the present proposal unless and until they answer it cogently and in public. That question is:

what is it in the American national interest which is in any way advanced by continued Israeli violation of international humanitarian law in the occupied territories?

      utffcmywgb
      1234567890