ISRAELI PALESTINIAN CONFLICT DETAIL DISCUSSION ESSAY

ISRAELI PALESTINIAN CONFLICT DETAIL DISCUSSION ESSAY

 

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is on ongoing dispute between Israel and the Palestinians Although the conflict is wide-ranging. the key issues are border security, water rights, control of Jerusalem, land pas, and legalities concerning refugees The violence resulting from the conflict has prompted other security and human rights concerns on both sides and internationally. It forms part of the wider Arab-Israeli conflict. The term is also used in reference to the earlier phases of the same conflict, between Zionist hefutzint and the Arab population living in Palestine under Ottoman or British rule.

Many attempts have boon made to broker a two-state solution, which would entail the creation of an independent Palestinian state alongside an independent Jewish state or next to the State of Israel (after Israel’s establishment 1948). As of 2009, a majority of both Israelis and Palestinians. according to a number of polls, prefer the two-state solution over any other solution as a means of resolving the conflict. Moreover, a considerable majority of the Jewish public sees the Palestinians’ demand for an independent state as just, and thinks Israel can agree to the establishment of such a state. A majority o’ Palestinians and Israelis view the West Bank and Gaza Strip as an acceptable location of the hypothetical Palestinian state in a two-state solution. However, there are significant areas of disagreement over the shape of any final agreement and also regarding the level of credibility each side sees in the other a upholding basic commitments A • handful of academics anvocate a one-state solution. whereby all of Israel, the Gaza Strip, and West Bank would become a bi-national state with equal rights lor all

Within Israeli and Palestinian society, the conflict generates a wide variety of views and opinions. This highlights the deep divisions which exist not only

between Israelis and Palestinians, but also within each society.

A hallmark of the conflict has been the level of violence witnessed for virtually its entire duration. Fighting has been conducted by regular armies, paramilitary groups, terror cells and individuals. Casualties have not been restricted to the military, with a ‘arge number of fatalities In civilian population on both sides.

There are prominent international actors involved in the conflict. The two parties engaged in direct negotiation are the Israel^, government, currently led by Benjamin Netanyahu, and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), currently headed by Mahmoud Abbas. The official negotiations are mediated by an international contingent known as the Quartet on the Middle East (the Quartet) represented by a special envoy that consists of the United States, Russia, the European Union. and the United Nations The Arab League is another important actor, which has proposed an alternative peace plan Egypt, a founding member of the Arab League, has historically been a key participant.

Since 2003. the Palestinian side has been fractured by conflict between the two major factions^– Fatah, the traditionally dominant party, and its later electoral challenger. Names Following llamas’ seizure of power in the Gaza Strip in June 2007. the territory controlled by the Palestinian National Authority (the Palestinian interim government) is split between Fatah in the West Bank, and llamas in the Gaza Strip. The division of governance between the parties has effectively resulted in the collapse of bipartisan governance of the Palestinian National Authority (PA)

A round of peace negotiations began at Annapolis. Maryland, United States, in November 2007. These talks aimed at having a final resolution by the end of

2008. The parties agree there are six core, or ‘final status,’ issues which need to be resolved

HISTORY

Periods of the conflict

On the historical timeline, the Israeli­Pa’eaten conflict has had six distinct phases’

• late 19th century-1917: The period of the Ottoman Empire rule in Palestine in which the Palestinians saw themselves as part of the overall Arab territories which were under the rule of the Ottoman Empire. During that period, the disputes were on the basis of religious background and not on national background.
• 1948: The period of the British Mandate of Palestine, in which both

parties were tinder British rule and under a single political entity – called Palestine in English. During this period the term ‘The Israeli-Palestinian conflicts was not used and instead the conflict was referred to as “the Jewish-Arab conflict over the l and of Palestine (by the Arab population and the British population), ‘the Jewish-Arab conflict over Erez•Israel” (by the Jewish population).

• 1967′ The period between the declaration of the State of Israel and the Six-Day War in which the parties resided in three separate political entities: The State of Israel, the Gaza Strip (which was controlled by Egypt) and the West Bank (which was annexed to Jordan).
• 1993: The period between the Six-Day War and the Oslo Accords, in which the conflicted parties reside in the areas addressed by the UN Partition P’an that were under the control of the Slate of Israel.

1993-2000: The period between the Oslo Accords and the Second Intifada, in which Israel exists alongside the

semi-sovereign political entity – the Palestinian Authority.

• 2000-present: The period between the beginning of the Second Intifada tip until today, in which Israel returned to perform arresting operations in Area A zones in the West Bank and Gaza and later on retreated from the Gaza Strip in Israel’s           unilateral
  disengagement from the Gaza Strip inadvertently led to the strengthening of Mamas, which in 2007 took control over the Gaza Strip.

Prominent events throughout the conflict

• King-Crane Commission (1919)
• 1920 Palestine riots
• 1921 in Jaffa
• 1929 Palestine nets
• 1936-1939 Arab revolt in Palestine
• The approval of the UN Partition Plan according to which Palestine would be divided into two states – a Jewish state and an Arab state (1947)
• 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandate Palestine
• 1948 Arab-Israeli            War,       1948

Palestinian exodus and the establishment of the state of Israel (1948)

• The creation of the Palestinian refugee problem (1948 – 1950)
• Suez Crisis (1956)
• War over Water (1964-1967)
• Six-Day War (1967) – Israel occupies the territories populated          by
  Palestinians from Jordan and Egypt (1967)
• War of Attrition (1968-1970)
• Black September – the deportation of the PLO from Jordan to Lebanon (1970)
• Terror attacks carried out from Lebanon on Israeli targets worldwide (1972 – 1982)
  • Yom Kippur War (1973)
  • 1978 South Lebanon conflict
  • Canso David Accords (19⁷9)
  • 1982 Lebanon War- the deportation of the PLO from Lebanon to Turns
  • 1982-2000 South Lebanon conflict
  • First Intifada (1987-1991)
  • Oslo Accords (1993, 1995)
  • Second Intifada (began in 2000)
  • Israel’s unilateral disengagement plan (2005)
  • 2008-2009 Israel-Gaza conflict PEACE PROCESS

  Oslo Accords

  In 1993. Israeli officials led by Yitzhak Rabin and Palestinian leaders from the Palestine Liberation Organization led by Yasser Arafat strove to find a peaceful solution through what became known as the Oslo peace process. A crucial milestone in this process was Arafat’s letter of recognition of Israel’s right to exist. In 1993, the Oslo Accords were finalized as a framework for future Israeli­Palestman relations. The crux of the Oslo agreement was that Israel would gradualty cede control of the Palestinian territories over to the Palestinians in exchange for peace The Oslo process was delicate and progressed in Ills and starts, the process took a turning point at the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin and finally came to a close Mien Arafat and Ehud Barak failed to reach agreement Robert Malley, special assistant to United States President Bill Clinton for Arab-Israel) Affairs, has confirmed that Barak made no formal written offer to Arafat Consequently, there are different accounts of the proposals considered. However, the main obstacle to agreement appears to have been the status of Jerusalem

  Camp David Summit (2000)

  In July 2000. U.S President Bill Clinton convened a peace summit between Palestinian President Yasser Arafat and Israeli Prime Minister EhudBarak Barak reportedly offered the Palestinian leader approximately 95% of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as Palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem, and that 69 Jewish. settlements (which comprise 85% of the West Bank’s Jewish sewers) would be ceded to Israel. He also proposed “temporary Israeli control” indefinitely over another 10% of the West Bank territory- -an area including many more Jewish settlements According to Palestinian sources, the remaining area would be under Palestinian control. yet certain areas would be broken up by Israeli bypass roads and checkpoints Depending on how the security roads would be configured. these Israeli roads might impede free travel by Palestinians throughout their proposed nation and reduce the ability to absorb Palestinian refugees

  President Arafat rejected this offer. President Clinton reportedly requested that President Arafat make a counter-offer, but he proposes none. No tenable solution was crafted which would satisfy both Israeli and Palestinian demands, oven unoer intense U.S pressure. Clinton blamed Arafat for the failure of the Camp David Summit. In the months following the summit, Clinton appointed former U S. Senator George J. Mitchell to lead a fad-finding committee that later published the Mitchell Report aimed at restoring the peace process.

  Taba Summit (2001)

  Israeli negotiation team presented a new map at the Taba Summit in Taba. Egypt in January 2001 The proposition removed the “temporarily Israeli controlled” areas, and the Palestinian side accepted this as a basis for further negotiation. However, Prime Minister Ehud Barak did not conduct further negotiations at that time: the talks ended without an agreement. The following month the right-wing Likud party candidate Ariel Sharon

  was elected as Israeli prime m’n:ster to Feoruciry 2001.

  Road Map for Peace

  One peace proposal, preserted by the Quartet of the European Union, Russia. the Wiled Nations and the United States On September 17, 2002, was the Road Map for Peace. This plan did not attempt to resolve difficult questions such as the fate of Jerusalem o’ Israeli settlements. but left that to be negotiated in later phases of the process. Israel did not accept the proposal as written but called out 14 “reservations” or charges before they would accept it, which were unacceptable to the Palestinian leadership The proposal never made it beyond the first phase. which called for a halt to Israeli settlement construction and a halt to Israeli and Palestinian violence, none of which was achieved.

  Arab Peace Initiative

  The Arab Peace Initiative (Arabic:

  ..,v;) was first proposed by Clown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in the Beirut Summit. The peace initiative is a proposed solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict as a whole, and the Israeli—Palestinian conflict in particular.

  The initiative was initially published on March 28, 2002. at the Beirut Summit, and agreed upon again in 2007 in the Riyadh Summit The peace initiative achieved the unanimous consent of all members of the Arab League, including both the llamas and Fatah Palestinian factions.

  Unlike the Road Map tor Peace. it spelled out “final-solution’ borders based explicitly on the UN borders established before the 1967 Six-Day War. It offered full normalization of relations with Israel, in exchange for the withdrawal of its forces from all the Occupied Terrier’s& including the Golan Heights, lo recognize “an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital” in the West Bank

  and Gaza Strip, as well as a ^–just solution’ for trio Palestinian refugees.

  Alhough the Prop°Sal was rejected outrght ny Israel when it was first proposed in 2002, the Arab League continues to raise it as a possible solution, and meet ngs between the Arab League and Israel have beer held. According to Hawai_i Arab leaders had threatened in February 2008 to withdraw their proposes unless Israel explicitly expressed an acceptance of tho initiative.

  Current Issues in dispute

  The following outlined positions are the official positions of the two parties; however, it is important to note that neither side holds a single position. Both the Israeli and the Palestinian sides include both moderate and extremist bodies as well as dovish and hawkish bodies

  Many Palestinians nowadays believe that Israel is not really interested in reaching an arrangement, but rather interested in continuing to control the entire territory from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River. As proof of their claims, they point to the expansion of the Jewish settlements during the terms of the Israeli left-wing political parties. the argument that it has always been Israel which has conquered territory which belonged to Arab countries, that the IDF entered Palestinian towns during the Intifada, as well as quotes of Israeli right-wing leaders and religious leaders who have expressed their support in a Greater Israel and in implementing a population transfer

  On the other hand, many Israeus nowadays believe that the Palestinians’ (we intentions are to conquer the Palestine regiun entirely and that their official claims are only a temporary strategy. As a proof to their claims, they note the rise of the Flames, which has called for the taceover o’ all parts of Israel, incitement against Israel made in the Palestinian schools’ textbooks and to the Palestinian political

  violence made against Israeli civilians within the Green Line borders.

  Due to the large number of opinions and interpretations, the question of The two demands of the parties is a political issue by itsetf, about whet many Israelis and Palestinians disagree.

  Core Issues

  A variety of concerns have emerged as key issues in seeking a negotiated settlement between the two sides Since the Oslo Accords, finalized in 1993. the government of Israel and the Palestinian National Authority (PNA) have been officially committed to an eventual two-stale solution There are six core or ‘final status’ issues which need to be resolved.

  Jerusalem

  The border of Jerusalem is a particularly delicate issue, with each side asserting claims over this city. The three largest Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity. and Islam—include Jerusalem at an important setting for their religious and historical narratives. Israel asserts that the city should not be divided and should remain unified within Israel’s political control. Palestinians clam at least the parts of the city which wore not part of Israel prior to Juno 1967. As of 2005, Mere were more than 719,000 people living in Jerusalem: 465,000 were Jews (mostly living in West Jerusalem) and 232,000 were Muslims (mostly living in East Jerusalem).

  The Israeli government, including the Knesset and Supreme Court, is centered in !he ‘new city” of West Jerusalem and has been since Israel’s founding in 1948. After Israel captured the ‘Jordanian-controlled East Jerusalem in the Slx-Day War^, rt assumed complete administrative control of East Jerusalem In 1980. Israel issued a new law stating, “Jerusalem, complete and united. Is the capital of Israel •

• At the Camp David and Taba Summits in 2000-01, the United States proposed a plan in which the Arab pals of Jerusalem would be given to the proposed Palestinian state while the Jewish parts of Jerusalem were retained by Israel All archaeological work under the Temple Mount would be jointly controlled by the Israeli and Palestinian governments. Both sides accepted the proposal in principle, but the summits ultimately failed.Israel has grave concerns regarding the welfare of Jewish holy places under possible Palestinian control When Jerusalem was under Jordanian control, no Jews were allowed to visit the Western Wall or other Jewish holy places, and the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives was desecrated. In 2000, a Palestinian mob took over Joseph’s Tomb. a shrine considered sacred by both Jews and Muslims, looted and burned the building and turned it into a mosque. There are unauthorized Palestinian excavations for construction on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which could threaten the stability of the Western Wall. Israel. on the other hand, has seldom blocked access to holy places sacred to other rebg•ons. Israeli security agencies routinely monitor and arrest Jewish extremists that plan attacks, resulting in almost no se•ous incidents for the last 20 years. Moreover, Israel has given almost complete autonomy to the Muslim trust (Wag) over the Temple Mount.Israel expresses concern over the security of its residents if neighborhoods of Jerusalem are placed under Palestinian control. Jerusalem has been a prime target for attacks by militant groups against civilian targets since 1967. Many Jewish neighborhoods have been tired upon from Arab areas. The proximity of the Arao areas. if these regions were to fall in the boundaries of a Palestinian state, would be so dose as to Threaten the safety of Jewish residents. Nadav Shragai states this idea in his study for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, An Israelisecunty body that was tasked in March 2000 with examining the possibility of transferring three Arab villages just outside of Jerusalem – Abu Dis, Al Azaria, and a-Ram – to Palestinian security control, assessed at the time that ‘Terrorists will be able to exploit the short distances, sometimes involving no more than crossing a street. to cause damage to people or property. A terrorist will be able to stand on the other side of the road. shoot at an Israeli or throw a bomb, and it may be impossible to do anything about it. The road will constitute the border! If that is the case for neighborhoods outside of Jerusalem’s municipal boundaries, how much more so for Arab neighborhoods within those boundaries,

  Palestinians have grave concerns regarding the welfare of Christian and Muslim holy places under Israeli control. They point to the several attacks on the Al­Aqsa Mosque (Mosjid al Aqsa) since 1967, Including a senous fire in 1969 which destroyed the south wing, and the discovery in 1981 of ancient tunnels under the structure of the mosque which some archaeolo asts believe have weakened the batting structures on the Al Arise Mosque.

  Some Palestinian advocates have made statements alleging that the tunnels were re-opened with tho intent of causing the mosque’s collapse Israel considers these statements to be totally baseless and unfounded, and to be deliberately intended to Incite aggression and public disorder, and stated this in a 1996 speech at the UN. The Israeli government claims it treats the Muslim and Christian holy sites with utmost respect.

  Israeli settlements in the West Bank

  In tho years following the Six-Day War, and especially in the 1990s dunng the Peace process, Israel re-established communities destroyed in 1929 and 1948 as well as established numerous new settlements in the West Bank. Those settlements are now home to about

  350,000 people. Most of the settlements are in the western parts of the West Bank, while others are deep into Palestinian terntory, overlooking Palestinian cities. These settlements have been the site of much Intercommunal conflict.

  The issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and, until 2005. tho Gaza Strip have been described as an obstacle to a peaceful resolution of the conflict. by the international media; as well as the international political community {including the US, the UK, and the EU

  These actors have also called the settlements illegal under international law; furthermore, the International Court of • Justice as well as international and Israeli human rights organizations consider the settlements illegal.

  However Israel disputes this; several scholars and commentators disagree, citing In 2005 recent historical trends to back up their argument, it has not changed the view of the international community and human rights organizations.

  As of 2006, 267.163 Israelis lived within the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The establishment and expansion of these settlements in the West Bank and at the time) the Gaza Strip have been described as violations of the fourth Geneva Convention by the UN Security Council in several resolutions. The European Union and the General Assembly of the United Nations consider the settlements to be illegal. Proponents of the settlements justify their legality using arguments based upon Article 2 and 49 of the fourth Geneva Convention, as well as UN Security Council Resolution 242. On a practical level, some objections voiced by Palestinians are that settlements divert resources needed by Palestinian towns, such as arable land, water, and other resources, and, that settlements reduce Palestinians’ ability to travel freely via local roads, owing to security considerations.

  In       2005,        Israe”s        unilateral

  disengagement plan, a proposal put forward oy Israel Prime Minister Anel Sharon. was enacted. All residents of Jewish settlements in the Gaza strip were evacuated, and all residential buildings were demolished.

  Various     mediators a id various

  proposed agreements nave shown some degree of openness to Israel retaining some fraction of the settlements which currently exist in the West Bank; this openness is based on a wen iuly of consicerations, sLch as, the desre to find real compromise between Israeli and Paiestinian territorial clams,

  Israfs’s position that rt needs to retain some West Bank land and settlements as a butte- in case of future aggression, and Israel’s position that some settlements are legitimate. as they took shape when there was no operative diplomatic arrangement, and thus they did not violate any agreement

  Former US President George W. Bush has stated that ne does not expect Israel to return entirely to the 1949 armistice lines because of “new realities on the ground” One of the main compromise plans put forth by the Clinton Administration would have allowed Israel to koop some settlements in the West Bank especially those which were in large blocs near the pre-1967 borders of Israel. In return, Palestinians would have received some concessions of land in other parts of the country. The current US administration views a complete freeze of construction In settlements on the West Bank as a critical Step toward peace. In May and June 2009, President Barack Obama said ‘The United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” and the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton stated that the President ‘wants to see a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts not ‘natural growth’ exceptions.”

• In the past, Israel has demanded control over border crossings between the Palestinian baritones end Jordan and Egypt, and the rght to set the Maori and export controls. asserting that Israel and the Palestinian territories are a single economic space.Pa ustiniaris insist or contiguous territory winch will in turn rupture the existing torritona, contiguity of Israel. In the inter.m agreements reached as part of the Oslo Accords, the Palestinian Authority has received control over clues (Area A) while he surrounding countryside has been placed under Israeli security and Palestinian civil administration (Area B) or complete Israeli control (Area C). Israel has built additional highways to allow Israelis to traverse the area without entering Palestinian cities. The initial areas under Palestinian Authority control are diverse and non-contiguous. The areas have changed over tune because of subsequent negoi,ations, includ.ng Oslo II. Wye River and Sharm el-Sheik. According to Palestinians. the separated areas make it impossible to create a viable nation and fails to address Palestinian security needs. Israel has expressed no agreement to withdrawal from some Areas B, resulting In no reduction in the division of the Palestinian areas, and the institution of a safe pass system, without Israelicheckpoints, between these parts. Because of increased Palestaman violence to occupation this plan is in abeyance. The number of checkpoints has increased, resulting In mom suicide bombings since the early summer of 2003. Neither side has pebiczed a proposal for a final map (Some maps have been leaked These, purporting to show Israeli proposals, are reputed to come from the Israel’s and the Palestinians).Other Issues

  A varety of concerns have become prominent issues between the two sides it

  regarcs to ongoing day-to day interactions, and actions by either side towards the other.

  Israeli military occupation of the West Bank

  Occupied Palestinian Territory is the term used by tee United Nations to refer to the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. and the Gaza Strip—territories which were conquered by Israel during the ‘967 Six-Day War, having formerly ocien controlled ey Egypt and Jordan. The !steel government uses the term Disputed Territones, to indicate is position that some territories cannot be called occupied as no nation had clear rights to them and Mere was no operative diplomatic arrangement when Israel acquired them in June 1967. The area is sti’l referred to as Judea and Samaria by some Israeli groups, based on the historical regional names from ancient times.

  In 1980. Israel explicitly annexed East Jerusalem. The United Nations rejected this annexation on August 70, 1980. Israel has never annexed the West Bank o’ Gaza Strip, and the United Nations has demanded the “[germination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect iw and acknowledgement of the sovereignty. territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries tree from th. eats or acts of force’ and that Israeli forces withdraw “from territones occupied in the recent conflict’ – the meaning and intent of the latter phrase is cksputed. See Semantc dispute.

  It has been the position of Israel that the most Arae-populated parts of West Bank (we^–lout major Jevash settlements), ono the entire Gaza Strip must eventually be par of ar independent Palestinian State However the precise borders of this state are in question In 2000, for example. Enuc Barer, offered Yasser Arafat an opportunity to establish an independent

  Palestinian Slate composed of the entire Gaza Strip and 92% of tne West Bank. Because of security restrict.ons, and BaraK’s opposition to a broad right of return, Arafal refused this proposal

  Some Pa estinians claim they are entitled to all of the West Bank. Gaza Strp, and East Jerusalem. Israel says t is justified in rot ceding all this ;and, because of security concerns, and also because the lack of any valid diplomatic agreement at the time means that ownersn o and bounearies or this land is open for ciscussion. Palestinians cairn any reductior of this claim is a severe deprivation o^f tne’ rights. In negot aliens. they claim that any moves to reduce Me noundanes of this land is a hostile move against their key interests Israel considers tnis land to be in dispute. and feels the purpose of negotiations is to define what the final borcers wilt he.

  Other Palestinian groups, such as Hamas, have in the past insisted ;NA Palestinians must control not only the West Bank, Gaza Strip. aria East Jerusalem, but also all of Israel proper For this reason, Hamas has viewed the peace process “as reigiously forbidden and po iticairy inconceivable”

  Mutual recognition

  The Oslo peace process was based upon Israel ceding authority to the Palestinians to run their own political and economic affairs In return. it was agreed that Paiestinians would promote peaceful co-existence, renounce violence and promote recognition of Israel among their own people. Despite Vassar Arafat’s official renunciation of terrorism and recognition of Israel. some Palestinian groups continue to practice and advocate violence against civilians and do not recognize Israel as a legit^.mate political entity.

  Palestinians state that their ability to spread acceptance of Israel was greetiy hamperee by Israeli restrctions an

  Palestinian political freedoms, economic freedoms, civil liberties. and quality of life. Many feel that their own opposition to Israel was justified by Israel’s apparent stifling of any genuine Palestinian political and economic development.

  It is widely felt among Israelis that Palestinians did not in tact promote acceptance of Israel’s right to exist. One of Israel’s major reservations in regards to granting Palestinian sovereignty is its concern that there is not genuine public support by Palestinians for co-existence and elimination of terronsm and incitement Some Palestinian groups. notably Fatah. the political party founded by PLO leaders, claim they are willing to foster co-existence if Palestinians we steadily given more political nghts and autonomy. In 2006, llamas won a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council. wnere it remains the majority party. While Hamas has openly stated in the past that it completely opposed Israel’s right to exist, and Its charter states this, more is evidence that its position may have softened by 2006. However. Israel contended in 2007 that Names has refused to recognize Israel in any valid way, and that it supported recent rocket attacks on Israel. In June 2009, llamas leaders mot with former US President Jimmy Carter, and said that llamas does not in any way recognize Israel.

  Israel cites past concessions—such as Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Stnp in August 2005, which did not lead to a reduction of attacks and rocket fire against Israel—as an example of the Palestinian people not accepting Israel as a state. Palestinian groups and Israeli Human Rights organizations (namely B’Tselem) have pointed out that while the military occupation in Gaza was ended, the Israeli government still retained control of Gaza’s airspace, territorial water, and borders, legally making it still under Israeli control They also say that mainly thanks to these restrictions, the Palestinian quality of life in the Gaza Strip has not improved

  since the Israel withdrawal. Furthermore, given that the Israeli army has run Incursions tido the Gaza Strip on various occasions. closed off its borders, and placed an embargo on the region, the Gann economy has since gone into free fall. This has led and continues to result in warnings of the Palestinian population becoming more radicalized unless conditions improve.

  Government

  The       Palestinian        Authority       is

  considered corrupt by a wide variety of sources, including some Palestinians. Some Israelis argue that it provides tacit support for extremists via its relationship enth llamas and other Islamic terronst movements, and that therefore It is unsuitable for governing any putative Palestinian state or (especially according to the right wing of Israel politics), even negotiating about the character of such a state. Because of that, a number of organizations, including the previously ruling Likud party, declared they would not accept a Palestinian stale based on the current PA. (LikuC’s former leader Ariel Sharon publicly declared that he rejected this position as 700 radical).

  A PA Cabinet minister, Saeb Deiced, declared this indicates that Israel Is seeking to maintain its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Israel has not recognised a Palestinian state, and has earned out extrajudicial killings of suspects within rho West Bank and G878 whom it claims have planned and led terrorist attacks within Israel. Some international observers have recommended that negotiations proceed anyway, claiming that internal Palestinian reform can be undertaken If negotiations make progress.

  Societal attitudes

  Societal attitudes in both Israel and Palestine are a source of concern to those promoting dispute resolution.

• Some Israelis are concerned that key Palestinian leaders have promoted incitement against and overall non­acceptance of Israel. including promotion of violence against Israel. Some Palestinians are concerned that key Israeli leadeis have refused to accept the reality of the Palestinian people and have been defended violence against Palestinians.Gaza blockadeBecause of an import-export ban imposed on Gaza in 2007. 95% of Gaze’s industrial operations were suspended. Out of 35,000 people employed by 3,900 factories in June 2005. only 1,750 people remained employed by 195 factories in June 2007.Closures have severely hindered health services in Gaza. During the period October to December 2007, the World Health Organization has conliimect the deaths of 20 patients, including 5 children. Between 2007-2008, 120 people in Gaza died because they were not allowed to access medical treatment

  The Israeli Government’s cut In the flow of fuel and electricity to the Gaza Strip has also been called collective punishment of the civilian population, which would be a violahon of Israel’s obligations under the taws of war. Starting February 7. 2008. the Israeli Government reduced the electricity It sells directly to Gaza. This follows the ruling of Israel’s High Court of Justice’s decision, which held, with respect to the amount of industrial fuel supplied to Gaza, that, The clarification that we made indicates that the supply of industrial diesel fuel to the Gaza Strip In the winter months of last year was comparable to the amount that the Respondents now undertake to allow unto the Gaza Strip. This fact also indicates that the amount is reasonable and sufficient to meet the vital humanitarian needs in the Gaza Strip.” The Jerusalem Post argued that Palestinians had killed Iwo Israelis In theprocess of delivering fuel to the Naha! Oz fuel depot.

  With regard to Israel’s plan, tne Court stated that, “calls for a reduction of free percent of the power supply in three of the ten power lines that supply electricity from Israel to the Gaza Strip, to a level of 13.5 megawatts in two of the tires and 12.5 megawatts in the third tine, we [the Court] wore convinced that this reduction does not breach the humanitaran obligations Imposed on the State of Israel In the framework of the armed conflict being waged between it and the Names organization that controls the Gaza Strip. Our conclusion is based, in part. on the affidavit of the Respondents indicating that the relevant Palestinian officials stated that they can reduce the load In the event limitations are placed on the power lines, and that they had used this capability in the past.”

  During the British Mandate and after 1e1g, when unrest started to become widespread, the term “collective punishment’^. was freely used by the British government to refer to measures they took against Arabs when unknown Arabs attacked Jews or Jews when unknown Jews attacked Arabs. In that era, it meant closure of shops, restriction of movement, and taxes or fines levied on towns as punishment. Supporters of ‘snapl have argued that Palestinian violence against Israeli civilians constitutes collective punishment of Palestinians for the actions of the;r govomment.

  Airspace

  The Wes: Bank and Israel form a strip only up to 80 kilometres wide. Israel has insisted on complete Israeli control of the airspace above the West Bank and Ganes well as that above Israel itself. A Palestinian compromise of Joint control over the combined airspace has been rejected by Israel.

• Palestinian armytrio Israeli Cabinet issueC a statement expressing that it does rot wish the Palestinians to build up an army capable of offensive operations, considering that the only party against which such an army courd be turned in the near future is Israel Itself However, Israel nas already allowed ‘or the creatior of a Palennien police that can ponied police operations and also carry out limited-scale warfare. Palestinians have argued that the Israel Defense Farces, a large and modem armed force. poses a direct and pressing threat to the sovereignty of any future Palestinian slate, making a defensive force ‘or a Palestinian state a matter of necessity l u this. Israelis claim hat signing a treaty while building an army is a show of bad intentions.Recent eventsIn December 2009, the Israeli government ordered a 10-month lull in permits for new settlement homes in the West Bane. The restrictions, which Israeli politicians and media have referred to as a “freeze”. Co not apply to East Jerusalem (whose annexation by Israel is not recognised internationally), municipal buildings, schools, synagogues and othercommunity   infrastructure      in          the

  sethernents. About 3,000 homes already uncer construction will be allowed to proceed. The Israeli government said the move was aimed at restarting peace talks. but Palestinian officials said it was insuff dent Palestinian officials have refusec to rejoin peace talks until a total bu!lcirg halt is imposed, Including in East Jerusalem. The ar nouncement Viewed cars oy the US government for a total freeze In settlement building. The US government, the European Union. Russ a and the UN have cnticized Israel’s Plans to continue bulding in East Jerusalem but both the US and the EU have stated that there should be no precorcitiors for resuming the suspended peace talks.

  Casualties

  The Office for the Coordination of Humanitanan Affairs for the occupied Palestinian territory (OCHoP f) was established in late 2000 by the United Nations as a response to the dererorat-ng humanitarian situanon in the West Bank and Gaza caused by military incursions and closures (See also: Second Intifada) The office monitors the conflict and presents figures relating to both internal-violence and direct conflict clasnes.

Casualty figures for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from the OCHAoPt (numbers in parentheses represent casua ties under age 18)
Year	Deaths		Injuries
	Palestinians	Israelis	Palesterans	Israelis
2008-26 12.08	464 (87)	31 (4)
2007	396 (43)	13 (0)	1843 (265)	322 (3)
2006	678 (127)	25 (2)	3194 (470)	377 (7)
2005	216 (52)	48 (6)	1260 (129)	484 (4)
Total	1754 (309)	117 (12)	6297 (064)	1183 (14)

All numbers refer to casualties of direct confl ct between Israelis and Palestinians including in IDF military operations, artillery snaking. search and arrest campaigns. Barrier demonstrations, targeted killings, setter violerce etc. The figures to not inclJde events indirectly related to the conf:ict such as casualties from unexploded ordnance, etc.. o’ events when the circumstances remain ur clear or are In dispute. The figures nclude all reported casualtes of all ages and both genders.

Brfselern. an Israeli non-governmental organization, also IfId titans comprehensive statistics on the conflict for both the First Inbfada and the Second Intifada.

Casualty figures for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from 137selem for the penod as of 29.9.2000 (Second Intifada) (numbers in parentheses rep esent casualties under age 18)
Year		Deaths
		Palestinians		Israel’s
2004		828 (179)		108 (8)
2003		58B(119)		185 (21}
2002		1032 (157)		421 (47)
2001		467 (82)		191 (36)
2000 (as of 29.09.2000)		279 (83)		41 (0}
Total		3194 (620)		946 (112)
Casualty figures for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from B’Tsolem for the period from 09.12.1987 to 29.9.2000 (First Intifada) (numbers in parentheses represent casuallies under age 18)
Year	Deaths
	Palestinians		Israelis
2000 (until 28.9)	16 (2)		2 (0)
1999	9 (0)		4 (0)
1998	28 (3)		12 (0)
1997	21 (5)		29 (3)
“996	74 (11)		75 (8)
199b	45 (5)		46 (0)
1994	152 (24)		74 (2)
14 9 93-31 12 93	42 (4)		19 (0)
1993-13.9.93	138 (37)		42 (0)
1992	138 (23)		34 (1)
1991	104 (27)		19 (0)
	145 (25)		22 (0)
1990
1959	305 (63)		31 (1)
• 5’i88	310 (50)		12 (3)
Dec 9-31 1987	22 (5)		0 (0)
Total	1549 (304)		421 (18)

Figures include both Israeli civilians and security farces and casualties Ir both tie Occupied Territories and Israel.

Casualty figures for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the 1936-1939 Great Arab Revott
Source	Cited by	Deaths
		Palestinians	Israelis
Arnon-Ohana, 1982, 140	Morris, Righteous Victims p 159.	4,500 (killed by other Arabs)
Various	Morris, Righteous Victims p 159.	3,000 to 6,000	several hundred

These figures rep esent deaths caused by the Palestinian uprising against the British mandatory government in Palestine, and include those killed by the British.