This is cross posted from the site, Missing Peace, and serves as a rebuttal to Harriet Sherwood’s report, “Israel approves new settler homes in East Jerusalem, Sept. 27., which characterized the plan to build new apartments in Israel’s capital as “provocative” and a threat to peace.
A new international outcry about the latest building plan in Jerusalem has led to a mini crisis in German Israeli relations.
Chancellor Angela Merkel reportedly called Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu in order to criticize a building plan in the Gilo neighborhood. Last week the plan received initial approval from the Jerusalem district planning and building committee of the Israeli Interior Ministry.
Earlier Merkel’s spokesman had expressed doubts about Netanyahu’s seriousness in regard to new negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.
Merkel wasn’t the only European leader to criticize Israel for approving the building plan, which will provide 1100 much needed new apartments to the population of Jerusalem.
EU commissioner Catherine Ashton also joined the chorus and called the plan ‘provocative’ and even urged Israel to ‘reverse its plans’.
Aside from the fact that these criticizers are totally ignorant when it comes to some of the most basic facts about Jerusalem and Gilo, there is also the deafening silence in light of Palestinian intransigence and blatant violations of signed peace accords.
Recently PA president Mahmoud Abbas, officially announcing the Palestinian statehood bid – which by the way constitutes a violation of the Oslo accords - delivered a speech to the General Assembly of the United Nations, that was full of distortions and incitement against Israel.
He received applause.
Similarly Senior Fatah official Abbas Zaki last week openly declared that the PA attempts to obtain full UN membership, were in fact meant as a next step towards the establishment of a Palestinian state in place of Israel.
No international outcry followed.
But let us return to the claim that the building of 1100 units in Gilo threatens peace or even the peace negotiations.
Here are seven facts everyone making claims like these should know:
1. Gilo is not a settlement. The Jerusalem neighborhood, situated roughly one kilometer beyond the 1948 armistice (Green) line, was mainly built on land that was purchased by Jews before World War 2. After 1967 when Israel in fact recaptured Gilo, additional land was sold to Israelis by Jabra Hamis the former mayor of Beit Jallah . The same land was later used for building projects in Gilo.The status of Jerusalem was left out of the 1947 partition plan and out of the Oslo accords. Jerusalem has had an overwhelming Jewish majority since the second half of the 19th century and has always been the capital of Israel.
2. Final status talks between Israel and the PA always focused on keeping Gilo and other Jewish neighborhoods beyond the Green Line within Israel.
3. Israel never committed itself to a building halt in Jerusalem. The city is suffering from a severe housing crisis caused by a lack of building due to political pressure and a shortage of available land in West Jerusalem, where the city borders one of Israel’s most important nature reserves. As a result rent for an average three room apartment in a Jewish neighborhood has skyrocketed to 900 $ a month. Compare that to the 220 $ for an average three room apartment in a Palestinian town on the West Bank.
4. The approval of the building plan by the Israeli Interior Ministry does not mean that building will start tomorrow. The process of building a neighborhood in Israel can take up to ten years from the moment a plan is submitted for initial approval to the first of a series committees dealing with building plans.
5. The particular plan in Gilo deals with building within the current neighborhood, as is shown on the maps below. Most of the building will take place in parts of the Gilo Forest on land situated between two ‘peninsula’s’ on the west side of Gilo, opposite land within the Green line where the Jerusalem Zoo and the Central Train Station are located.
6. No Arab village on the southern or eastern side of Gilo is threatened by the building plan, nor are the planned units ‘encroaching’ on land owned by Arabs.
7. Gilo is the only Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem directly bordering an area under PA control. The strategic importance of Gilo to the security of Jerusalem became clear during the Second Intifada, when Palestinian terrorists conducted daily shooting attacks on the neighborhood from BeitJallah. As a result houses on the east side of Gilo had to be fortified. In the end a huge wall was built to protect Gilo against incoming fire from Beit Jallah.
Meanwhile Danny Ayalon Israel’s deputy Foreign Minister criticized the foreign intervention in building affairs in Jerusalem and said that the condemnations only serve the Palestinian agenda of making preconditions to complicate future peace negotiations.
Indeed, the way large parts of the international community react to building in the Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem has taken the form of a Pavlovian response in which rationality doesn’t matter anymore.
Apparently all that counts is to make clear that, contrary to the historical and legal Jewish claim on the whole of Jerusalem, Israel has no business in the parts of Jerusalem that where illegally occupied by Jordan during the war of independence in 1948.







11 comments
Comments feed for this article
October 3, 2011 at 5:38 pm
NormanF
Leaving the labyrinthine nature of the Israeli bureaucracy aside, Israel is dismissing world complaints it would have heeded in the past in no small part due to Israel’s social justice movement. The Israeli government can’t justify not building affordable new housing for Jewish families when there has been unchecked and illegal Arab construction in Jerusalem. On that of course, the world remains silent. Jerusalem has an acute housing shortage and the demand exceeds the available supply. What would be built in Gilo comes nowhere close to addressing the demand. Instead of catering to the world’s anti-Semitism shabbily masquerading as so-called diplomatic protests, Israel’s Jerusalem policy should be driven first and foremost by the needs of its own people. Those will not wait no matter what the world thinks of Jews living in Jerusalem.
October 3, 2011 at 7:36 pm
Truthtriumphs
I would go further and proclaim the long -forgotten truth, namely, that the Jews have the right in International law, based on the San Remo Agreement and Mandate for Palestine documents, of 1920 and 1922 respectively, to settle wherever they wish in Judea and Samaria, because it was given exclusively to the Jews for their sovereignty, to reconstitute the Jewish homeland, in the same way that Syria, Iraq, lebanon and Trans-Jordan were given for Arab sovereignty and self determination. These agreements remain binding today, and Arab determination and foreign interests to deny these truths in no way alter the legal status of J & S.
The above post is a good example of all that is wrong with Israel advocacy.
The points he raises should come as a post-script….written as they are they just sound like excuses.
No, Jews should react with outrage to being censured in this way, and stop being defensive. They should ram the truth down the throats of the anti-semites, that this is their land. The Arabs living there are the invaders and colonialists from the huge wave of immigration principally from Syria and Egypt in the 20th.century.
As for Merkel, her remarks are beyond shameful and shameless…. from the leader of a nation who will be remembered first and foremost for the industrial genocide visited on the nation, whose contemporary sin is to provide homes for those remnants and their descendants who escaped Germany’s assassins, in their ancient capital.
October 3, 2011 at 7:56 pm
pretzelberg
… because it was given exclusively to the Jews for their sovereignty
None of those treaties said anything of the kind. Why make such a claim when you know it isn’t true?
October 4, 2011 at 2:38 am
Another Joshua
@pretzelberg
You say “None of those treaties said anything of the kind.”
Are we to deduce from this that the Arabs were not entitled to a state of Iraq or Lebanon under the treaties and mandates subsequently created as well?
Throwaway comments like these only subtract from discussion Pretzelberg and annoy.
The legal status of Palestine is constantly raised as a means to undermine Israel’s existence and these treaties and mandate documents are clearly the instruments that conferred Jewish sovereignty over all of Palestine, which of course includes lands occupied by Jews post-1949 and pre-1967. That’s the bare truth.As much as Israel’s detractors try to imply different meanings to the legal positions, what’s left of the argument is confused ramblings and no coherent position to make any sense of. Both by explicitness and implicitness there is no other way of looking at those treaties.
The discussion should end at this point , but of course it doesn’t since the rights of inhabitants were also to be protected, and that includes the human rights of every party, jew and non-Jew. Political facts on the ground changes the dimensions of the discussion, but not the bare bones of the legal positions. Both the Labour Party, and Likud to lesser extent, depending on when they were in power have subscribed to the 2 State Solution. In so doing , they have underplayed the legal card in the hope to find a partner for peace to enable a position to develop into full realisation of that objective. So far with very limited results.
With the present constitution of countries in the UN, if given a free vote on anything to do with Israel and applying double standards ALWAYS condemns Israel. And that gives credence to the point of view that Israel constantly breaches international law, whether it does or not. This has caused a change of positions regarding whether now to play up the legal arguments, basing them on those earlier treaties. If anything, it’s a permanent reminder to israel’s detractors that no legal entity of Palestine can ever come into existence without a final status agreement that must be agreed between the parties. that much, Arafat understood when he signed the Oslo Interim agreement in 1995 (read Article Xlll(7)).
October 4, 2011 at 6:41 am
Another Joshua
Sorry. Should read Article XXXl(7)
October 4, 2011 at 5:40 am
Daniel Bielak
Exactly right.
October 3, 2011 at 9:36 pm
Penny
I have never understood this ‘outrage’, nor why buildings in Jerusalem are -apparantly – the worst threat in the world. Greater, even, than Iran’s nuclear ambitions. More horrendous than the mass slaughter of populations in Darfur, Congo and Rwanda.
If the Palestinians intended to forge a long-term peace agreement with Israel, surely a few houses can’t be a barrier so high that it cannot be surmounted?
Israel’s alleged use of passports got more of a reaction from our British government and Press than did the death of one of our own citizens, Mary Jane Gardener, victim of the bombing of Jerusalem’s bus station. William Hague spoke on TV; some of our newspapers carried the story on the front page. I don’t recall them coming out for Mary Jane.Or Kaye Wilson, who played dead in order to survive the stabbing that killed her American friend in the Mata forest.
Truthtriumphs is right. It really is time to stop with the defensive. Would those who make such demands of Israel dare tell Putin, for example, where he can and cannot build?
October 3, 2011 at 9:40 pm
Penny
I’m getting tired….just to clarify, Hague et al came out to express their outrage etc., over the passports – not over Ms Gardener and Ms Wilson.!
October 4, 2011 at 2:45 am
Avinoam Ben Dor
Some records for those who do not have the patience to learn history:
During the course of recent history, the Jewish people have received documents and signed several agreements with prominent leaders, countries and international organizations.
Following documents:
1) Balfour Declaration. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917
2) Agreement Between Emir Feisal Husseini and Dr. Weizman: http://www.nymei.org/arab-jewish-treaty.html
3) American Proposal for Jewish Homeland, January 21, 1919: http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~samuel/americandraft.html
4) League of Nations resolution and Mandate for Palestine: http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/181c4bf00c44e5fd85256cef0073c426/2fca2c68106f11ab05256bcf007bf3cb!OpenDocument See Also: This is my Land: http://www.analyst-network.com/articles/65/MandateForPalestineThelegalaspectsofJewishrightsbyEliHertzwithassistancebyDavidSinger.pdf
5) Charter of the United Natioely be parties
2. Paragraph 1 of this Article shall not be interpreted as giving grounds for delay or postponement of the negotiation and conclusion of agreements for placing mandated and other territories under the trusteeship system as provided for in Article 77.
So you see dear readers, Jews have the right according to International law, to settle wherever they wish in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, because it was given exclusively to the Jews for their sovereignty, to reconstitute the Jewish homeland, and Arab determination and foreign interests to deny these truths in no way alter the legal status of Palestine.
ns; June 26, 1945:
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/unchart.htm#art77 1. Except as may be agreed upon in individual trusteeship agreements, made under Articles 77, 79, and 81, placing each territory under the trusteeship system, and until such agreements have been concluded, nothing in this Chapter shall be construed in or of itself to alter in any manner the rights whatsoever of any states or any peoples or the terms of existing international instruments to which Members of the United Nations may respectiv
What I don’t understand is why isn’t any Jewish international lawyer/s or Jewish law firm/s take this issue to a legal court in the US or Geneva and sue the UN for failing to fulfill its obligations under it own Charters?
October 4, 2011 at 3:18 am
benorr
Ignore them, Israel is the only state in the world that is under microscopic scrutiny.China is occupying Tibet,Turkey is occupying Kurdistan and Cyprus,and these two don’t bother to ask anyone’s permission to build anywhere that they wish to build…………..
Israel shouldn’t have to bother either……………..Build and Build and then Build again and again……….
October 4, 2011 at 5:15 am
Truthtriumphs
Pretzelberg
“None of those treaties said anything of the kind. Why make such a claim when you know it isn’t true?”
Not just ignorant, but willfully so!
Can you read?
If so, I suggest you go to the original documents and read them…..easily available on the internet.
I suggest also that you consult the international lawyers, such as Howard Grief and Jacques Gauthier, amongst others, who have spent many years researching the subject, and all come to the same conclusion.
If they are wrong, point to chapter and verse.
You can even go to the minutes taken at San Remo….why don’t you?
FYI the date was April 25, 1920.