Susya – Land-Grabbing By EU Backing

 

emergencyssxfoiThe huge ongoing campaign against the demolition of buildings [mostly tents] constructed against a court order in Susya village has been successful backed now by some NGOs, US, EU and UN. From Western mainstream media one easily can get picture that Israel plans to destroy ancient Arab village in occupied territory and grabbing land owned by local villagers. The true picture is a bit different, even opposite.

The question is not only some tents in Susya, besides media war the campaign is part of wider plan – known as “Fayyad Plan”, to occupy land for fictional Palestine state from Israel – land which is under direct Israeli control according the “Oslo Accords,” that incorporates within its terms UN Security Council Resolution 242 (1967), which set the basic terms for comprehensive peace in the area. The case also shows an excellent example about the hypocrisy of European Union which same time plans sanctions against Israel due illegal Israeli settlements while continuously financing illegal Arab settlements.

 

Susya vs. Fake Susya

European Union-American acceptance of the lie of “Arab Susiya” is both a result from a successful PR campaign and against the reality. The archaeological evidence clearly proves that Jews lived in Biblical and Talmudic times until as late as the 9th century in Susya, while academic researchers have categorically established that Arabs never lived there. Modern are aerial photographs decades ago show that not one Arab lived in Susiya, for centuries, only a few thousand Arabs populated the relatively vast southern Hebron Hills and other Arabs came from the Hebron area to stay in caves for two months during the season for planting and reaping wheat or to grave sheep and goats; other than that, Arabs were never to be seen because their homes were elsewhere. All of that changed soon after the early 1980s when the Jews returned after 1,500 years.

The focus of the creation of this lie has been Susiya, the largest Jewish community in the area, although less than 200 families live there. It is located several hundred yards from the Talmudic city, which is protected as a natural park. The European Union – i.a. – have invested tens of thousands of dollars to bring Arabs to the narrow stretch of land separating modern and ancient Susiya.

Local resident Karni Eldad describes this side of settlement activities in i24news as follows:

Everybody knows that the settlements beyond the Green Line receive extensive subsidies and incentives. For example, a small community south of Hebron receives wind turbines to produce free electricity, it gets free mobile homes, free air conditioners, free toilets, free water tanks, a free library, free agricultural sheds, a free mobile clinic and free health care, and even basic food items, completely for free. Oh yeah, and a free mosque. Why a mosque? Because this settlement is an illegal Palestinian outpost, established in Israeli territory (Area C according to the Oslo Accord’s territorial division), and is located near the Jewish settlement of Susya in the southern Hebron hills. Who finances it? The EU, of course.

Below short video about the real ancient history and origins of Susya:

 

And below the Illegal Palestinian Settlement – fictional Arab village – of Susya:

cc711ccf3f2ea47dd15feddae2ecdb533c0b7e69

Earlier about Susya case in Demolition of Susya Settlement as a Result Unsolved Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

 

Susya as part of “Fayyad Plan”

After the signing of the Oslo Accord in 1993, and especially since 2009, Palestinians began to establish outposts in Area C with massive European funding. These outposts are designed to interrupt the continuity of Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria. This program is called the “Fayyad Plan”, named after Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian official who conceived it. The Europeans, for their part, are joining the initiative as they consider Judea and Samaria occupied territory and are working to establish a Palestinian state in the entire territory.

The so-called “Fayyad Plan” entitled “Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State,” is breathlessly ambitious. Fayyad, a US-educated economist and former senior World Bank official, challenged the Palestinian policy of liberation through armed struggle by proposing peaceful, proactive development. The plan had and still has US and EU support and has got aid in the billions. Also Israel has backed Palestinian economic development and reform from bottom up to establish a demilitarised state.

endoccThe Fayyad Plan includes 3 major pillars – 1. Structural reform of the central and local government administration. 2. Restoring and re-establishing the security system (Palestinian Police, courts, prisons, etc.). 3. Building the economic and physical infrastructure in all areas, (banks, public and educational facilities, electricity, water, sewage and roads etc.) whilst focusing on Area C.

In her analysis about “Fayyad Plan”, The Fayyad Plan: Implications for the State of Israel , Natalia Simanovsky describes the benefits of plan as follows:

In evaluating the successes of the Fayyad plan, addressing its obstacles and Israeli misapprehensions, this paper argues that the creation of an independent Palestinian state will work towards Israel’s advantage for the following reasons: First, it guarantees the two-state solution, ensuring that the State of Israel remains Jewish and democratic. Second, Israel’s responsibility towards the Palestinians will be dramatically reduced, for a Palestinian state would become responsible for its own citizens, territory and borders. Third, an independent Palestine will improve Israel’s serious legitimacy problem, for the relationship will be that of two sovereign states, as opposed to the current asymmetrical relationship between a state and a non-state. Fourth, a Palestinian state will strengthen the hand of the moderates, namely Fateh and Fayyad, while weakening the terrorist organization Hamas and other Islamic radicals. Finally, the environment for peace negotiations will improve, as Israel’s security needs will be met and the Palestinians, having achieved their decades-long desire for self-determination, will be negotiating from a place of pride and accomplishment, as opposed to the hopelessness and humiliation that engulfs them on a daily basis.

 

However the “Fayyad Plan leaves a number of issues unresolved, such as Jerusalem, the right of return, borders, the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and, lastly, Gaza. The essence of the Fayyad plan was to build the apparatus of a Palestinian state within two years, regardless of progress in the stalled peace negotiations with Israel. Israeli officials reacted with consternation over what they saw as a unilateral action even Fayyad has rejected calls for a binational state and unilateral declaration of statehood.

The core negative aspect of the plan is, in my opinion, that it Fayyad calls for massive Palestinian development in Area C – an area in which is under direct Israeli control – the Palestinian Authority exercises civil powers and responsibilities as well as functional jurisdiction under the umbrella of overall Israeli security and civil administration – the fate of which is intended by the Interim Agreement to be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations.

See more at: Palestine Ending the Occupation, Establishing the State (Fayyad Plan) http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/A013B65A5984E671852576B800581931#sthash.Wwzi9pgP.dpuf

 

Quiet annexation with help of EU hypocrisy

“Aid to the Bedouin” is a political program of the Palestinian Authority that was in conjunction with  the previous PM Salam Fayyad,  which intends to gradually  take control  over Area C, and to add it into the area  of the Palestinian Authority (PA).  In addition the EU is building hundreds of illegal structures in the West Bank, for example near Ma’aleh Adumim and its E1 area (great Jerusalem). Some of the structures are even being built on nature reserves, where construction is forbidden. All these buildings contravene the Oslo Accords, which give Israel full administrative responsibility and authority over Area C so the EU is participating in a violation of the Oslo II Agreement.

Transarent-Logo-e1361793675969Israeli NGO Regavim has been very active with gathering data and conducting field surveys especially in Negev, Judea and Samaria. Regavim recently released a report revealing that the European Union has spent millions of dollars actively erecting some 500 unauthorized pre-fabricated buildings in strategic areas located in Area C in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) in violation of the Oslo Accords. These reports are exposing very cleartThe hypocrisy of the European Union. Blaming Israel for taking unilateral steps, whilst simultaneously being directly, deeply and heavily involved in illegal and unilateral activity to the benefit of the Palestinian Authority. According Regavim in recent years, European support has moved from passive diplomatic and financial assistance to a situation of active cooperation in illegal building which the Palestinian Authority has been advancing unilaterally since 2009, as part of its strategic plan to create a Palestinian state de facto, while avoiding the need for negotiations with Israel. One of the central goals of this plan is the development of building initiatives specifically in Area C, (which is defined by the Oslo Accords as under full Israeli control) with the intent of chipping away at this area bit by bit, and thus creating a strip of territory between the area of Hebron, Samaria, and Jericho. This strip would endanger the security of the State of Israel and its ability to defend itself within defensible borders.

According Regavim reports in September 2012, the European Union announced the allocation of 100 million euros toward the advancement of projects for the Arab population across Area C, which is under full Israeli control (— in addition to the 100 million euros transferred in 2011). The first paragraph in the document detailing the allocation of the funds indicates an earmarked transfer of 7 million euros (in 2012 alone) for “development of land and basic infrastructures in Area C, See an example of EU funding decision here . The September 2014 EU document indicates an additional – earmarked – funding allocation (apart from the regular annual aid), in the sum of 11 million euros, intended for establishing outposts (“shepherds’ communities”) in Area C.

Nimetön (27)While unilateral measures of the PA are encouraged, promoted and funded by the European Union against Israeli law, the Oslo accords etc., its leaders criticize the State of Israel, accusing it of taking unilateral steps. For example the EU threatens sanctions against Israel, should Israel promote programs that constitute “measures to prevent the two-state solution and the establishment of a Palestinian state with territorial contiguity”.

More in: Report of the Involvement of the European Union Il-Legal Building

 

Part of BDS

According DEBKAfile the new proposals published on 22nd July 2015 by the European Council for Foreign relations [ECFR, a pan-European think tank with offices in seven European capitals] go beyond labeling Israeli goods made in “settlements” in the West Bank and East Jerusalem (for boycotting) – to include Israeli banks. Its boycott would cover bank loans and mortgages, qualifications earned in settlement institutions and the tax-exempt status of European charities that deal with Israeli settlements. Under European Commission guidelines from 2013, EU- and member-state-funded lending cannot be provided to Israeli businesses and individuals operating in the occupied territories. In addition the report questions whether Europe should accept qualifications from academic, medical and other Israeli institutions based in the West Bank. Likewise, there is a question mark over whether the EU should be dealing with Israeli institutions – such as the Ministry of Justice and the national police headquarters – which are based in East Jerusalem.

Nimetön (26)The Israeli government has described Europe’s steps on labeling as discriminatory and wrong-headed, suggesting they are akin to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which Israel regards as anti-Semitic. News of the report’s publication caused Tel Aviv Stock Exchange banking stocks to fall 2-2.5 pc.

Earlier [on April 2015] 16 of the European Union’s (EU) 28 foreign ministers co-signed a letter to EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, urging her to advance the creation of guidelines to separately label goods produced in the West Bank as part of an economic offensive on Israel. The labeling plan was first mooted in 2012, but the 16 member states told EU foreign affairs head Federica Mogherini it was now time to press ahead as part of efforts to force Israel to divide in a “two state solution.” (More in Top Priority of EU Foreign Policy: A New ‘Jude’ Badge )

My conclusion

The only valid and legally binding framework that has governed, and continues to govern, the relationship between Israel and the Palestinians is still the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement (1995), with its related documents, commonly termed the “Oslo Accords,” that envelopes all the other agreements and arrangements between the two sides and incorporates within its terms UN Security Council Resolution 242 (1967), which set the basic terms for comprehensive peace in the area.

Under the Oslo accords, the West Bank was divided into three zones, A, B and C, pending a permanent peace deal. Area C, where Israel maintains security and civil control, compromises more than 60% of West Bank territory. It includes the Jordan Valley where Israel has transformed the desert flats into lucrative agri-business settlements, west of the no-go military zone of border patrols and electronic fences on the frontier with Jordan.

The Susya region lies in Zone C, the archaeological evidence clearly proves Jewish ancient ties to area in question while Arab ties are only recent and temporary; land-grabbing with international campaign tries to grab land from Jews to Arabs and not opposite . The Susya case is not question about human rights, its is about politics to make solutions on the ground instead of negotiations.

I_stand_with_Israel_by_ElNino1920

 

Advertisements

5 Responses to Susya – Land-Grabbing By EU Backing

  1. WMcT says:

    Ari, I very much doubt this will influence your point of view, which is redolent with the sickly-sweet scent of hasbara disinformation.

    Nevertheless, it might give you pause for thought to learn that the Israeli Defence Ministry, who are ultimately responsible for the somewhat oddly-named “Civil” Administration that arbitrarily rules the roost in Area C, have leaked to Haaretz that “Sussiya [sic], the Palestinian village which is subject to plans for house demolitions and forced population transfers, is located on private land owned by local residents”, and that the document passed to Haaretz “appears to show that the residents cannot be evicted from their properties, and that if structures are demolished the owners have the right to continue to use the land for agricultural purposes.”

    Oh dear. So those Ottoman-era deeds of ownership turned out to be genuine after all.

    This will, of course, greatly upset your right-wing settler friends at Regavim (you two do make for strange bedfellows, I must say), whose primary aim – in the pursuit of “a Jewish Zionist agenda for the State of Israel” – is the summary expulsion of the Palestinian population from what they consider to be Jewish Land.

    As is well known, Regavim (the body behind the demolition orders in the first place) would like nothing better than to see the villagers of Susiya turfed out on their ear and their lands appropriated in double-quick time by the settlers.

    Fortunately there are others, both in Israel and abroad, who show a greater degree of respect for the law and for what can and cannot be done by an occupying force (under the terms of the 4th Geneva Convention of 1949 and its strictures on transferring population into occupied territory). It is a pity you are not among them, and an even greater pity that you further the flagrant Regavim lie of a “land-grab” by the very group – the Palestinians of Susiya – who are having their land grabbed from them, and who are subject to planning restrictions that would make Kafka wince.

    Perhaps the Defence Ministry are looking for a suitable fig-leaf to hide their embarrassment: a way out of what is clearly becoming an extremely awkward situation for them. I am sure they are ultimately less than happy at being pressed by strident settler voices into actions that will only drag Israel’s international name through the mud even more than it has been already. Susiya is rapidly turning into an excellent recruiting tool for BDS, and it is also pissing off Washington. Not before time.

    Here is the piece:
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.667817

    • Ari Rusila says:

      Despite the landownership demolition can be justified due missing building premission and due archeological site – in Israel, Susya as well abroad in similar societies.

      • WMcT says:

        Ah. Yes. That “similar societies” there would actually be “similar military occupations in which over 90% of all planning permission applications by the occupied population have been denied* while settlement by the occupying power – in contravention of international law and even the law of the occupying power itself – is not only tolerated but encouraged”.

        How many such “similar societies” can you name? More pertinently, how many such societies would a democratic state (such as Israel professes to be) WISH to associate itself with?

        *Dating from 2000 onwards on an annual basis. See OCHA reports passim, and this:

        http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/63036CA48D0D719685257E5E00507AD7

        or this:

        http://unispal.un.org/unispal.nsf/47d4e277b48d9d3685256ddc00612265/f2473fbcb2008d7485257e8b00575bbc?OpenDocument

        I draw your attention to the comments herein above by Robert Piper:

        “Susiya is emblematic of a pattern of injustice that is repeating itself across many parts of the West Bank. Too many communities are coming under multiple threats and intimidation – by legal process, by bulldozer, by settler violence – to relocate completely or relinquish surrounding agricultural and grazing lands on which their livelihoods depend. The international community cannot stand by and witness these acts in silence. The destruction of private property in an occupied territory is prohibited under international humanitarian law. I call on the Israeli authorities to suspend all demolitions of Palestinian structures in Area C and to provide its residents with a planning and permit regime that allows them to meet their needs.”

        Ari, let’s call a spade a spade. This is brazen discrimination. If anyone were actively looking for an opportunity to label Israel’s behaviour in the South Hebron Hills region of Area C as tantamount to apartheid, or even to ethnic cleansing, well, it’s not hard to draw that conclusion here.

        Of course it is totally unacceptable to say such things. All the same, the dirty little secrets of Area C are coming out at last.
        Some in the Defence Ministry are clearly worried about the soiled laundry being displayed in full public view.

        Real friends of Israel ought to be worried, too: this is not helping anyone except a few greedy settlers and rabid nationalists.

        Yes, strange bedfellows indeed. 🙂

      • Ari Rusila says:

        Normally after war the loser(s) fate is difficult; for example after IIWW millions of Germans were moving out from their homes to West, only two decades ago Serbs were kict out from Krajina/Croatia, some parts of BiH as well from south Kosovo – and all without any compensation. Some half million Jews escaped from MENA region to Israel, again without compensation. However most Arabs have been able to stay in their hometowns in Judea and Samaria, those who couldn’t have got billions of bucks as international aid. Of course there can be remarkable improvement innsituation when he loser will acept a bitter compromise and make negotiated peace as it has been done in many other conflicts.

%d bloggers like this: