Israel legalises settler homes on private Palestinian land

[webfact]

Israel legalises settler homes on private Palestinian land

By Maayan Lubell

REUTERS

 

Israeli lawmakers attend a vote on a bill at the Knesset, the Israeli parliament, in Jerusalem February 6, 2017. REUTERS/Ammar Awad

 

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israel passed a law on Monday retroactively legalising about 4,000 settler homes built on privately owned Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank, a measure that has drawn international concern.

 

The legislation has been condemned by Palestinians as a blow to their hopes of statehood. But its passage may only be largely symbolic as it contravenes Israeli Supreme Court rulings on property rights.

 

Israel's attorney-general has said it is unconstitutional and that he will not defend it at the Supreme Court.

 

Though the legislation, passed by a vote of 52 to 60, was backed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing coalition, it has raised tensions in the government.

 

Political sources have said Netanyahu privately opposes the bill over concerns it could provide grounds for prosecution by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

 

But the far-right Jewish Home party, a member of the coalition looking to draw voters from the traditional base of Netanyahu's Likud, pushed for the legislation after the forced evacuation of 330 settlers last week from an outpost built on private Palestinian land.

 

With Netanyahu under police investigation on suspicion of abuse of office, an allegation he denies, Likud has been slipping in opinion polls. Opposing the law would have risked alienating his supporters and ceding ground to Jewish Home.

 

Last-minute appeals this week by Netanyahu to postpone the vote until after he meets U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington on Feb 15, were refused by Jewish Home, political sources said.

 

In London, where he met Prime Minister Theresa May on Monday, Netanyahu told Israeli reporters he did not want to delay the vote and that he sought only to update Washington ahead of time - which he said he did. The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

 

Netanyahu himself did not attend the vote because he was on a plane back from London when it was held.

 

"BLACK FLAG"

 

Hanan Ashrawi, a senior member of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the main Palestinian political umbrella body, said in a statement that the law gave settlers a green light to "embark on a land grab".

 

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist, racist coalition government are deliberately breaking the law and destroying the very foundations of the two-state solution and the chances for peace and stability," Ashrawi said.

 

The U.N. Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Nickolay Mladenov said in a statement that the law "will have far reaching legal consequences for Israel and greatly diminish the prospects for Arab-Israeli peace".

 

However, Netanyahu may face little to no criticism from the White House, which has signalled a far softer approach to the settlement issue than that of the Obama administration.

 

"We are voting tonight on the connection between the Jewish people to its land. This entire land is ours," Likud minister Ofir Akunis told parliament.

 

Opposition leader Isaac Herzog of the Zionist Union said a black flag hung over the "insane law that threatens to destroy Israeli democracy".

 

Israeli Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit has described the law as unconstitutional and a breach of international law since it allows expropriation of private land in areas Israel seized in the 1967 Middle East war.

 

Under the new law, settlers could remain on the land if they built there without prior knowledge of Palestinian ownership or if homes were constructed at the state's instruction. Palestinian owners would receive financial compensation.

 

Anti-settlement group Peace Now said it would petition the High Court against the law that sanctions more than 50 settler outposts built without government approval.

 

Most countries consider the settlements illegal and an obstacle to peace as they reduce and fragment the territory Palestinians want for a viable state in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

 

Israel disputes this and cites biblical, historical and political connections to the land, as well as security needs.

 

(Reporting by Maayan Lubell; Additional reporting by Matt Spetalnick; Editing by Kevin Liffey and Alison Williams)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-07

[stevenl]

The AG's statement that the law is unconstitutional gives hope it will be thrown out.

[pumpuy]

     Why am I not surprised at all ....?

[impulse]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Though the legislation, passed by a vote of 52 to 60...

 

Even that wouldn't surprise me.

[Ulysses G.]

After 70 years of Palestinian violence, terrorism and recalcitrance, can't really blame Israel for trying to speed things up  on signing a peace treaty. Maybe a little motivation will help.

[Ulysses G.]

The facts. Israel was not the one to start this mess or the one that refuses to end it.

 

If Palestine were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down theirs, there would be no Israel - Benjamin Netanyahu.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Ulysses G.

[AsiaCheese]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

The AG's statement that the law is unconstitutional gives hope it will be thrown out.

Not very likely. Biblical reasons, you know...

[dexterm]

OP...
"Opposition leader Isaac Herzog of the Zionist Union said a black flag hung over the "insane law that threatens to destroy Israeli democracy"."

 

Just as John Kerry warned a couple of months ago: you can have two states, or you can have one state. If you have one state, then it can either be a Jewish state, or it can be a democratic state, but it cannot be both.

 

If the bill gets past the Supreme Court, it would certainly be a game changer.

It would definitely be the end of the two state solution. Then Israel must face the dilemma: if you annex the land, you annex the people who live there.

 

Then, do you 
- give Palestinians equal rights as citizens
- practise overt apartheid
- engage in ethnic cleansing

 

My hopes for an eventual one state secular Israeli democracy may be coming sooner than I anticipated.

[gamini]

1 hour ago, Ulysses G. said:

After 70 years of Palestinian violence, terrorism and recalcitrance, can't really blame Israel for trying to speed things up  on signing a peace treaty. Maybe a little motivation will help.

I hope I that I will never have to meet a person like you. Your extremist racial views are deplorable. Why do you hate the Palestinians so much? Most Jews deplore the actions of the present Israel government.

[Cats4ever]

I am gobsmacked by the headline. I cannot believe that Israel would ever do something so demonstrably unfair. Ben Netanyahoo will fix it, I am sure.

[Ulysses G.]

15 minutes ago, gamini said:

I hope I that I will never have to meet a person like you. Your extremist racial views are deplorable. Why do you hate the Palestinians so much?

The Palestinians are not a race and I deplore the fact that they started the violent conflict in the first place, refused the UN deal that would have given them their own land for the first time ever, attacked Israel for accepting the same deal and when they lost, turning to Terrorism instead.

They have hurt themselves at every step, but never seem to learn from it. IMO, the settlements are a response to seventy years of obstinate behavior on their part.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Ulysses G.

[ilostmypassword]

4 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

The Palestinians are not a race and I deplore the fact that they started the violent conflict in the first place, refused the UN deal that would have given them their own land for the first time ever, attacked Israel for accepting the same deal and when they lost, turning to Terrorism instead.

They have hurt themselves at every step, but never seem to learn from it. IMO, the settlements are a response to seventy years of obstinate behavior on their part.

And the Palestinians aren't anti-semitic either since they themselves are semites.

[Ulysses G.]

2 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

And the Palestinians aren't anti-semitic either since they themselves are semites.

 

Wrong again. Semitic refers to Semitic languages, but Anti-Semite only applies to Jews.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism

[dexterm]

26 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

The Palestinians are not a race and I deplore the fact that they started the violent conflict in the first place, refused the UN deal that would have given them their own land for the first time ever, attacked Israel for accepting the same deal and when they lost, turning to Terrorism instead.

They have hurt themselves at every step, but never seem to learn from it. IMO, the settlements are a response to seventy years of obstinate behavior on their part.

I disagree with every part of your mythology. Debunked many times before on TV. Can do so again some time on another more appropriate thread maybe.

 

You seem to regard the bill as some sort of combined collective punishment for previous generations, or as an incentive to accept any crumbs of land that may fall from the Israeli table. It ain't going to happen is it?

 

Looking to the present and the future, do you honestly think this unilateral move, illegal under international and Israeli law, simply to appease some fanatical settlers and to keep Netanyahu's slim majority in power will bring lasting permanent peace recognized by all the parties concerned and the global community?

 

[ilostmypassword]

10 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Wrong again. Semitic refers to Semitic languages, but Anti-Semite only applies to Jews.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism

What you don't seem to get is that using the roots of words to ordain what they should and shouldn't mean is pointless.  It may be that racism should refer to strict questions of race(although anthropologists mostly maintain that there aren't). But it has changed through time and now has what linguists call a "developed sense." 

A semite is " a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs." So logically speaking, if you're an anti-Semite, than you should be against Jews and Arabs.  But saying that is just as inaccurate as saying that you can't be a racist because Arabs aren't a race.

I can't believe that you are incapable of comprehending something so blindingly obvious. 

[Ulysses G.]

The dictionary says you are wrong. That is a fact. Read the link. Not impressed by personal theories - nothing but spin.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Ulysses G.

[Scott]

Anti-Semite  refers to Jews and that's where we will drop this off-topic discussion.   This thread is about settlements on private Palestinian land.   Stay on topic, please.  

 

Edit:   One post now removed.   Back on topic or face suspension.  

[starky]

16 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

The facts. Israel was not the one to start this mess or the one that refuses to end it.

 

If Palestine were to lay down their guns tomorrow, there would be no war. If Israel were to lay down theirs, there would be no Israel - Benjamin Netanyahu.

Says the Israeli. Prior to WWII I dont think there was any great rush to get to Palestine was there?

[notmyself]

Sorry

 

Why are the settlements on privately owned land considered illegal?

[wiserthinker]

Since I was kid we were taught that Israel has no defined borders, and I challenge anyone here to define to me what is the final borders of Israel if they were any ? - "Everyone imposes his own system as far as his army can reach"  -Joseph Stalin.

Edited February 7, 2017 by wiserthinker

[Ulysses G.]

44 minutes ago, starky said:

Says the Israeli. Prior to WWII I dont think there was any great rush to get to Palestine was there?

I am American and Jews were moving to the region back in the 1800s and they had a constant presence for thousands of years before that. There were more Jews living in Jerusalem than Arabs well before 1900.

The truth is that there was plenty of land for everybody and Jews and Arabs could have lived together, but that was not to be. 

The land under dispute was offered to the Palestinians by the UN in 1947, but they refused and attacked Israel instead. Personally, I do not see how anyone can claim that much of this is Palestinian land that is being "settled". It would be if they had accepted the UN solution 70 years ago, but they didn't.

[manarak]

14 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

I am American and Jews were moving to the region back in the 1800s and they had a constant presence for thousands of years before that. There were more Jews living in Jerusalem than Arabs well before 1900.

The truth is that there was plenty of land for everybody and Jews and Arabs could have lived together, but that was not to be. 

The land under dispute was offered to the Palestinians by the UN in 1947, but they refused and attacked Israel instead. Personally, I do not see how anyone can claim that much of this is Palestinian land that is being "settled". It would be if they had accepted the UN solution 70 years ago, but they didn't.

what would an American do when someone tries to steal his land?

....

Yes, exactly.

[Kiwiken]

17 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

The Palestinians are not a race and I deplore the fact that they started the violent conflict in the first place, refused the UN deal that would have given them their own land for the first time ever, attacked Israel for accepting the same deal and when they lost, turning to Terrorism instead.

They have hurt themselves at every step, but never seem to learn from it. IMO, the settlements are a response to seventy years of obstinate behavior on their part.

You are so anti semitic but only against Palestinians. The Palestinian People are a race just as any people's Israeli's were not a Country until 1948. You look only at One side not both. open your eyes

[Ulysses G.]

1 hour ago, manarak said:

what would an American do when someone tries to steal his land.

No one stole anything. The Palestinians were mostly tenant farmers working someone else's land from the Ottoman Empire.The UN gave them the opportunity to change all that, but they refused. 

Palestinians are not a race and they called themselves generic Arabs until very recently.

I am not saying that they should not have their own country, but they are in no position to be demanding all the land that they turned down 70 years ago. They started numerous wars and lost them all. To victors go the spoils.

Edited February 7, 2017 by Ulysses G.

[Kiwiken]

2 hours ago, notmyself said:

Sorry

 

Why are the settlements on privately owned land considered illegal?

Where do you live I and my armed Tribe will come and settle on it. Don't worry it is your privately owned land so it cannot be illegal can it. You just stated this

[stevenl]

4 hours ago, notmyself said:

Sorry

 

Why are the settlements on privately owned land considered illegal?

Because it is privately owned land by Palestinians, taken from them and according to this law without any recourse.

[Kiwiken]

Israel and its People by referring to the West bank and Gaza strip Arabs as Palestinians recognise their status as Palestinians. And the Palestinians by referring to Israel and the Israeli's by default are also recognising the existence of both Israel and the Israelis. Having established this it is time the two got of their asses and began negotiating  a lasting settlement for either two states One Arab , One Jewish majority or on a single Secular State.  

[dexterm]

9 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

No one stole anything. The Palestinians were mostly tenant farmers working someone else's land from the Ottoman Empire.The UN gave them the opportunity to change all that, but they refused. 

Palestinians are not a race and they called themselves generic Arabs until very recently.

I am not saying that they should not have their own country, but they are in no position to be demanding all the land that they turned down 70 years ago. They started numerous wars and lost them all. To victors go the spoils.

Utter drivel on every point, debunked many times previously.

>>To victors go the spoils.

... we don't live in the age of Genghis Khan. We live under international law and the Geneva Convention to which Israel is a signatory. Just because the bully wins, does not make it right.

Israel is not above the law, and it is about time the global community reminded them.

 

There is considerable doubt that this legislation will pass the Supreme Court. But if it does Israel will be taken to the ICC for the war crime of looting Palestinian land.

 

Big headache for Israel, USA and her other friends..and all to appease a minority of religious fanatics in Netanyahu's cabinet so that he can cling to power. Will not bring peace, and will delegitimize the state of Israel. Not worth it.

 

Lets hope the decent, more intelligent and civilized elements of Israeli society prevail in any future election.

Edited February 8, 2017 by dexterm
spelling

[uptheos]

I knew that 330 million Obama secretly gave the Palestinians on his last day, would come back and bite them on the bum. Maybe they could buy a few houses off the Israeli's with the money?

[dexterm]

4 minutes ago, uptheos said:

I knew that 330 million Obama secretly gave the Palestinians on his last day, would come back and bite them on the bum. Maybe they could buy a few houses off the Israeli's with the money?

Palestinians are not allowed to buy houses in the exclusively racist Jewish only colonies.