Israeli residency proposal unnerves Jerusalem's Palestinians

[webfact]

Israeli residency proposal unnerves Jerusalem's Palestinians
By MOHAMMED DARAGHMEH

JERUSALEM (AP) — An Israeli proposal that could potentially strip tens of thousands of Palestinians in Jerusalem of their residency rights has sent shudders through the targeted Arab neighborhoods — areas that were dumped outside Israel's separation barrier a decade ago, even though they are within the city's boundaries.

The government's review of the status of these neighborhoods, home to tens of thousands of people, illustrates the fragile position of Palestinians in a city where they have long suffered discrimination and are caught between the pragmatic conveniences of living under Israeli control and the loyalties to the Palestinian cause.

With few exceptions, Jerusalem's Palestinians are not Israeli citizens, and instead hold residency status that can be revoked. Removing residency rights en masse appears highly unlikely due to legal hurdles and domestic and international opposition. But government critics said the fact that it is even being discussed sent an ominous message to Palestinians.

"There is nothing permanent about permanent residency," said Yudith Oppenheimer, executive director of Ir Amim, an advocacy group that promotes coexistence and equality in the city. "This is another reminder for them how conditional that status is."

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the review at a recent meeting called to discuss a wave of Israeli-Palestinian violence that has roiled the area in the past month. About a third of the city's 300,000 Palestinians live in these neighborhoods.

An official who attended the meeting said the review would look at "all the issues" affecting these neighborhoods, including residency rights, which are coveted by Palestinians because they allow them to work and move freely inside Israel and gain access to Israeli health care and social services. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss internal deliberations, said the latest violence had exposed a "vacuum" in these outlying neighborhoods, which have a minimal Israeli presence but are not considered West Bank territory.

In the past five weeks, 11 Israelis have been killed in Palestinian attacks, mostly stabbings, while 54 Palestinians, including 32 labeled by Israel as attackers, have died from Israeli fire. Many of the Palestinian attackers have originated in east Jerusalem, the section of the city captured by Israel in 1967 and claimed by the Palestinians for their capital.

Israel has responded with a crackdown in Palestinian neighborhoods, deploying thousands of security forces and placing roadblocks and military-style checkpoints at the entrances. The new review of those areas that lie outside the separation barrier has increased Palestinian fears that they are not wanted.

"We are part of the Palestinian people. We are Jerusalemites, and we will remain in Jerusalem until a political solution is found," said Munir Izghayer, a community leader in the Kufr Aqab neighborhood.

Israel captured then-mainly Arab east Jerusalem in the 1967 Middle East war. After the war, it redrew Jerusalem's municipal boundary, expanding it into the West Bank to encompass what were then small Palestinian communities, and annexed the lands that were made part of the city as part of its capital.

The annexation was never internationally recognized, and few Palestinians applied for Israeli citizenship, viewing it as acceptance of an illegitimate occupation.

Today, Jerusalem is an open city, and thousands of Palestinians work in the more affluent western part. But interaction between Jews and Arabs is largely superficial, and Arab neighborhoods suffer from neglect and poverty, with overcrowded classrooms, pothole-ridden roads and limited municipal services.

The situation is especially dire in neighborhoods outside the separation barrier.

Israel built the barrier in the 2000s in response to a wave of suicide bombings and other deadly attacks. In Jerusalem, the structure slices through some Arab neighborhoods and places others on the West Bank side altogether.

With development tightly restricted by Israel, Arab neighborhoods inside the barrier have seen real estate values skyrocket in recent years due to a housing crunch.

As a result, areas outside the barrier have experienced a wave of unregulated construction as people search for cheaper housing within municipal boundaries, since leaving the city for nearby West Bank communities could result in a loss of residency rights.

"They are building everywhere here to find places for poor Jerusalemites to live in because if they move to the West Bank, their IDs will be taken" said Mohammed Samarah, a 59-year-old unemployed restaurant worker, pointing to a new 12-story high-rise in Kufr Aqab.

Although these outlying neighborhoods are considered part of the city, residents must pass through checkpoints in order to reach jobs, hospitals and holy sites in the heart of east Jerusalem. Israeli work crews rarely venture beyond the barrier, fearing confrontations with the local population. Last year, some areas had limited or no running water for weeks.

Samarah, who grew up in Jerusalem's Old City, said he now fears that Israel is plotting to take away his residency rights, which include unemployment assistance of about $600 a month. Since 1967, Israel has stripped some 14,000 Palestinians of residency, mostly in cases of people who have moved away, even to the West Bank, for more than seven years.

"I'm very concerned about my ID. The only way to protect it is to go and live inside Jerusalem, but I don't have money. It's very expensive to live out there. I will wait and see," he said.

But most important, he said he was concerned about losing his connection to the Old City — site of the Al-Aqsa Mosque, an important Palestinian national symbol that has been at the center of the latest unrest.

"I want the ID to go to the Old City, to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, to the place of my childhood," he said.

Netanyahu's office declined to comment on his plans. Mayor Nir Barkat's office also refused to discuss Netanyahu's latest proposal, though in the past the mayor has said he has worked hard to narrow the gaps between the city's western and eastern sections.

The odds of Israel actually taking action appear slim. Israeli leaders often brag about keeping Jerusalem unified, and dividing the city, even its outlying parts, would likely run into opposition from nationalists who dominate Netanyahu's coalition.

Emanuel Gross, a law professor at the University of Haifa, said the plan would require passage of a new law in parliament and could also violate international law. "This is not a simple thing," he said.

Asked about the proposal on Monday, U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby urged Israel to avoid "provocative actions and rhetoric," and said stripping people of their rights "would certainly be of concern to us."

Oppenheimer, the coexistence activist, said suggestions that these neighborhoods could simply be turned over to the West Bank failed to recognize the deep Palestinian connection to Jerusalem.

"They moved to these areas because they insisted on being Jerusalemites, and this is the only way they can maintain their Jerusalem status," she said. "We cannot deny all these ties to the city, cut them off from the city, and think they will become something else."


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-10-28

[arfurcrown]

Now I seem to recall a similar system being put into place elsewhere. Weren't those affected at that time by the decisions pushed into selected areas so as to confine them and restrict their movements, business, work, social and religious activities?

The properties they vacated and left behind were then taken over by others if my memory and history is correct ?

Ah well it seems as some people are taking lessons from history.

The tragedy is that those lessons if put into practice the subsequent actions are or could be considered somewhat provocative and aggressive then the reactions may well lead on to more discontent loss of life and injury to many innocents .

[ezzra]

Now I seem to recall a similar system being put into place elsewhere. Weren't those affected at that time by the decisions pushed into selected areas so as to confine them and restrict their movements, business, work, social and religious activities?

The properties they vacated and left behind were then taken over by others if my memory and history is correct ?

Ah well it seems as some people are taking lessons from history.

The tragedy is that those lessons if put into practice the subsequent actions are or could be considered somewhat provocative and aggressive then the reactions may well lead on to more discontent loss of life and injury to many innocents .

Comparing Jews being put in ghettos and gassed by the millions to a revocations of social benefits entitlement to a populations that want nothing more than seeing you dead, burned and banished from your homeland, is feebleminded, ignorant of the real fact, and silly to even go there...

[Ulysses G.]

If Palestinians stopped the bombing/stabbings/rockets and other terrorism, they would not have these problems. They are there own worst enemies.

[vogie]

If Palestinians stopped the bombing/stabbings/rockets and other terrorism, they would not have these problems. They are there own worst enemies.

Maybe if the Israelis gave back stolen land, it might help too?

[noitom]

It's human rights transgression.

[Ulysses G.]

Now I seem to recall a similar system being put into place elsewhere.

Not in Nazi Germany. Jews were targeted purely because of their religion and they were non-violent. The Palestinians have been at war with Israel for 70 years and have caused the restrictions against them to prevent terrorist attacks. They are responsible for their own plight.

[ehs818]

In reading the above posts I'm reminded of something that Golda Meir, former Israeli Prime Minister said in the 60's:

"There will never be peace between Israel and the Palestinians until Palestinian mothers love their own children more than they hate Israelis".

[Pakboong]

Now I seem to recall a similar system being put into place elsewhere.

Not in Nazi Germany. Jews were targeted purely because of their religion and they were non-violent. The Palestinians have been at war with Israel for 70 years and have caused the restrictions against them to prevent terrorist attacks. They are responsible for their own plight.

I thought they were targeted for their ethnicity based on the Nurnberg Laws

[Seastallion]

Now I seem to recall a similar system being put into place elsewhere. Weren't those affected at that time by the decisions pushed into selected areas so as to confine them and restrict their movements, business, work, social and religious activities?

The properties they vacated and left behind were then taken over by others if my memory and history is correct ?

Ah well it seems as some people are taking lessons from history.

The tragedy is that those lessons if put into practice the subsequent actions are or could be considered somewhat provocative and aggressive then the reactions may well lead on to more discontent loss of life and injury to many innocents .

Comparing Jews being put in ghettos and gassed by the millions to a revocations of social benefits entitlement

to a populations that want nothing more than seeing you dead, burned and banished from your homeland,

is feebleminded, ignorant of the real fact, and silly to even go there...

Some might say that the feeble minded ignorance is to bring being gassed into a discussion that did not even allude to it and is not relevant. What Israel has done and is doing is indeed building walled ghettos and subjecting the occupants to disgusting discrimination and deprivation. The parallel is apt.

Whose homeland? Palestinians who have lived there for countless generations, or the children of European migrants whose only claim to it being a homeland is unprovable links to an ancestor of 50 generations ago?

[RockyBeerbelly]

If Palestinians stopped the bombing/stabbings/rockets and other terrorism, they would not have these problems. They are there own worst enemies.

You mean if Palestinians would stop bombing they would get access to their own water in the West Bank? The illegal settlements would disappear? They will get access to the "C" zone again on the west bank? They will not be randomly bombed anymore in Gaza? Are you really that naive or are you just speaking out your wish and support for the current fascist leaders in Israel?

[FangFerang]

Like many other places (hint) the power brokers on both sides see no point in reconciliation. They would lose power, and cease to have a pretext for keeping their respective public distracted.

[Ulysses G.]

They have caused all these things themselves by refusing to make peace and attacking innocent civilians. The Palestinians have given Israel every reason to treat them harshly.

[RockyBeerbelly]

The current tally is11 Israeli deaths and 54 Palestinian deaths, so how this works exactly. 32 (!?) of the Palestinians which were murdered by the Israeli gestapo were related to the 11 deaths of the Israelis. So every Israeli killed was stabbed by 3 different Palestinians!?!? If one has the brain of a 5 year old, one could accept this BS, but then still, how about the other 22 Palestinians who were murdered? What was the justification for that? Are they retaliation murders: kill 5 Palestinians for every 1 Israeli who dies? And are those 5 Palestinians chosen at random, since, who cares, right. they're only Palestinians after all and not members of the Aryan Israeli uber mensch.....

[Ulysses G.]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

[Pakboong]

"Shock and Awe" was the deterrence method in early Israeli statehood based on the simple fact that Israel was surrounded by enemies. But, some 70 years later, what does it still accomplish other than convert fence sitters into card carrying anti-semites?

[vogie]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

Since when is war about killing children, since 2006 129 Israeli children have been killed compared to 1523. Your rhetoric is fuelled by hate rather than logic!

[DaddyWarbucks]

They have caused all these things themselves by refusing to make peace and attacking innocent civilians. The Palestinians have given Israel every reason to treat them harshly.

To say that the Palestinians are being treated "harshly" by Israel is an understatement.

They are being driven off their land in one of the longest and most inhuman operations of ethnic cleansing in modern times.

[RockyBeerbelly]

They have caused all these things themselves by refusing to make peace and attacking innocent civilians. The Palestinians have given Israel every reason to treat them harshly.

Treat them harshly = systematically extermination of a group of people (2,300 slaughtered in 2014 alone), deprive them IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY of access to water and electricity, confiscate their land and bulldoze their homes in which they have lived for generations, decline them the right for international trade, imprison them by the hundreds of thousands on a piece of infertile land, refuse them access to medical care, etc.

It might be me, but I find this a bit more than treating a group of people harshly. Its like saying that the Jews were "treated harshly" when they were sent to concentration camps (Hitler found the Jews had given him every reason to be so harsh). Or the "harsh treatment" of half a million Tutsi women when they were raped by Huti soldiers. According to the Hutu political leaders the Tutsi women had given the Hutu every reason for the rape. Or how about the harsh treatment of North Korean "Dissidents". These dissidents have given the North Korean government every reason to treat them harshly....if only these dissidents would not refuse to make peace with the wonderful North Korean regime......

[Seastallion]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

If it's warfare as you assert, then the Palestinians are freedom fighters, resistance fighters, or soldiers, not terrorists.

Lets run with that definition.

[Seastallion]

"Shock and Awe" was the deterrence method in early Israeli statehood based on the simple fact that Israel was surrounded by enemies. But, some 70 years later, what does it still accomplish other than convert fence sitters into card carrying anti-semites?

No! Not antisemites, but anti-Zionists or Anti-Israelis. Jewishness has nothing to do with it.

[Seastallion]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

Since when is war about killing children, since 2006 129 Israeli children have been killed compared to 1523. Your rhetoric is fuelled by hate rather than logic!

Since the IDF started handing out T-shirts with a picture of a pregnant Arab woman in the cross-hairs of a scope, and the slogan, "One shot, two kills.".

The label "baby killers" once applied to Nazis, is indeed quite apt.

[Pakboong]

Dayan and Ben-Gurian, et al.. developed this strategy with only experience as Terrorists against the British Mandate. It may have made sense at the time. The IDF was formed by terrorists who evolved to combat terrorism. That is only okay if this young country continues to evolve. Simply, not nearly as appropriate now as it was in 1948.

[Johpa]

If Palestinians stopped the bombing/stabbings/rockets and other terrorism, they would not have these problems. They are there own worst enemies.

No, the Palestinians worst enemy remains an Israel run by the Likud, the Orthodox, and Netanyahu. But they do run a close second in that race. There are no winners here, no winning outcomes for either side.

[RockyBeerbelly]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

If its warfare, then how can you speak of terrorism?

Palestinians are fighting for their own country! Its their homeland, so if you call it war, why dont you call them by the correct name: freedom fighters. If the resistance in WWII stroke hard against the Nazis, the Nazis stroke back HARD so the resistance could learn a lesson. And why should the Nazis have cared if the retaliation murders were people not involved in the resistance attack. All non Nazis were secondary people any way, dont mess with the betters....

I wonder why it is you use "evil Islam" to express your frustration to the rapid decline of global support in fascist Nethanyahu. I also wonder how it is YOU can use "evil islamic" in your post and still scream "anti-Semitic" to anyone who opposes the fascist Likud party. Don't you think this is a double standard? Like: I can say whatever I want about any religion, but as soon as you say something about the Jewish religion, I have the full right to be the victim and rudely yell at you that you are a anti-Semitic who probably supported the extermination of Jews in WWII....

[Ulysses G.]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

If its warfare, then how can you speak of terrorism?

Easy. It is a form of warfare that has been around for centuries. However, in the 2000s, only evil entities resort to purposely targeting civilians.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[rethaier]

Now I seem to recall a similar system being put into place elsewhere.

Not in Nazi Germany. Jews were targeted purely because of their religion and they were non-violent. The Palestinians have been at war with Israel for 70 years and have caused the restrictions against them to prevent terrorist attacks. They are responsible for their own plight.

If you owned a nice little house and farm and it was taken from you at gunpoint your view may be a wee bit different.

[Ulysses G.]

Not when you attacked the other guy and stole his house first. The Palestinians were the ones who started stealing Jewish land that was bought legally at the beginning of last century. Turn about is fair play.

Edited October 28, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[RockyBeerbelly]

Since when is warfare restricted to matching the number of injured and killed caused by terrorists? When these evil Islamic scum strike, you strike back HARD so they learn a lesson. Don't mess with your betters.

If its warfare, then how can you speak of terrorism?

Easy. It is a form of warfare that has been around for centuries. However, in the 2000s, only evil entities resort to purposely targeting civilians.

Looks like there is some common ground between us after all: Since 2000 9,151 Palestinian civilians were purposely slaughtered by the evil entity which is called the state of Israel.

For the rest I do disagree. I think the attacks in especially the 70ties by the PLO WERE terrorist attacks (like the Munich Olympic massacre), and every one in his/her right mind should oppose these kind of actions. But since the second intifada, the attention has turned to targeting the occupying forces, the oppressors of the Palestinians, the fascist of the Likud party, and that has made the attacks since 2000 very clearly resistance/freedom fighter attacks. (after all, its been a few decades since the last PLO attack outside of Palestine) That this resulted in civilian casualties on Israels side, is a part of warfare, but has everything to do with Israels own politics. Things would look very different, if Israel would have honored (some of) the 60 some UN resolutions they completely ignored (actually they accepted only resolution 181, for the obvious reasons). There would be two states, (which Israel openly say they will never accept), Palestinians wouldnt have to worry anymore if they wanted to visit one of their holy sites, they would have access to their farm land again, they can trade, they have water for irrigation, etc.

[TimmyT]

If Palestinians stopped the bombing/stabbings/rockets and other terrorism, they would not have these problems. They are there own worst enemies.

Maybe if the Israelis gave back stolen land, it might help too?

this land is as stolen as, for example, Saipan island, which was conquered by US during the WWII.

but Us left-liberal mafia wants to have a Palestinian pistol at the Israeli temple (in order to control mighty Jewish diaspora all over the World) - that's why it does not allow to get rid of people who are not Israeli citizen.

Palestinians want to have a state? perfect! send them all to the Palestinian territory.

Edited October 28, 2015 by TimmyT