By Ted Belman
INSS recently published a paper Jewish Enclaves in a Palestinian State. The authors thought it appropriate to investigate this option, because,
-
A massive evacuation of settlements located outside the large settlement blocs, home to about 100,000 residents, will be necessary if future Israeli governments seek (or are required to) implement the principle implied by two states for two peoples.
It is defeatist to acknowledge that we might be required to evacuate this number. Don’t we have a say in the matter; better still, a veto. But worse to suggest that “the principle implied by two states for two peoples” is that each state must be free of Jews or Arabs, respectively. Certainly, no one is suggesting that Israel be free of Arabs. In fact no such principle is implied but the PA is demanding it never the less.
The authors continue,
-
Nonetheless, the evacuation of tens of thousands from their homes and their settlements, including forcible evacuation of those who refuse to leave at the behest of the government, is a difficult task for the country, and could potentially result in bloodshed and civil war. Thus there is a need to examine other, less conventional ideas that could reduce the number of Israelis living beyond the final borders of the State of Israel who will need to be evacuated, including the idea of retaining Jewish settlements as enclaves within the borders of a Palestinian state, provided that it is in the context of a permanent agreement that brings about an end to the conflict.
The idea appears impractical, first and foremost from a security perspective, especially given the state’s responsibility for the security of all its residents and citizens, both within its borders and beyond. Nonetheless, an initial analysis of this possibility is in order, irrespective of any opinion on its political or diplomatic feasibility.
The idea itself is not new. A territorial enclave is sovereign territory of a state that is not connected by land to the main territory of the state and is entirely surrounded by land territory of another state. There are territorial enclaves that extend over large areas of thousands of square kilometers, but enclaves are generally small, comprising an area of several square kilometers or even less. In most instances, there is no problem traveling from the enclave to the mother state, but sometimes, passage involves a complex administrative procedure. The world political map shows approximately 300 territorial enclaves. Some 200 of them are located near the border between India and Bangladesh, some 20 are found on the border between Holland and Belgium, and the rest are located in various areas of Europe and Asia.
The Jewish settlements outside the large settlement blocs in the West Bank can be divided into three categories of enclaves: sovereign Israeli enclaves within Palestinian territory; autonomous Israeli settlements under Palestinian sovereignty; and settlements of Jews in the territory of a Palestinian state with no special status.
The largest settlements – Ariel, Ma’aleh Adumim, Efrat, Kiryat Arba – with tens of thousands of residents, will remain under full Israeli sovereignty as part of the State of Israel, and their residents will remain Israeli citizens. Agreed-upon routes will be used for passage to and from these settlements to other areas in the State of Israel, and traffic on these routes will be unrestricted, without oversight by the Palestinian state. Today, the total population in these settlements is 69,000, and their built-up areas total 7,700 dunams. This area will be taken into account during the discussion of exchange of territories between the State of Israel and the Palestinian state. If Efrat and Ma’aleh Adumim remain within the boundaries of the State of Israel as an integral part of a permanent border, only Ariel and Kiryat Arba will remain as two enclaves that are home to some 25,000 people on a built-up area of some 3,500 dunams.
Ten mid-size settlements, each home to between 2,000 and 7,000 people, will be in the territory of the Palestinian state and under its sovereignty, but they will conduct themselves as if they were autonomous in all respects. These settlements are Beit El, Ofra, Emanuel, Kfar Adumim, Kochav Yaacov, Eli, Kedumim, Talmon, Karnei Shomron, and Shiloh. Any Israeli in these settlements will keep his Israeli citizenship, and the settlements will conduct their lives independently in all municipal-social-administrative areas, such as education, social services, and health. The total population in these settlements is some 40,000, and their built-up areas total 8,500 dunams.
The residents of some sixty-five small and isolated settlements with a total population of 36,000 who decide to remain in their homes will be able to retain their Israeli citizenship and also receive Palestinian citizenship. These settlements will be under the full sovereignty of the Palestinian state. The residents will retain their right to ownership of their private lands and the public areas in the settlement, but in all other matters, including the right to vote, they will be citizens of the Palestinian state. Those who remain in these settlements will be subject to the sovereignty and the laws of the Palestinian state, as Israeli Arabs are subject to the sovereignty of the State of Israel. The territory of these settlements will not be taken into account during the discussion on exchange of territories between Israel and the Palestinian state.
A permanent status agreement on the basis of the principles reviewed here could ensure the continued existence of some of the Jewish settlements and make forced evacuations unnecessary. The residents themselves will choose whether to remain in their homes. Over time, some and perhaps most of this population will choose to return to the borders of the State of Israel of their own volition and receive compensation for the private property they left behind in the settlements, while others will remain willingly within the borders of a Palestinian state on the basis of the proposed models. This action will be taken freely and without the use of force, and occur over a lengthy period of time.
Another positive aspect is that the areas of the enclaves can be expected to be limited compared to the extensive areas of the settlement blocs discussed until now. Creation of the enclaves will reduce the need for territorial “fingers” in the direction of Kiryat Arba, Ariel, and Emanuel, which will reduce the amount of land needed for land swaps with the Palestinians in a peace agreement. The land of the settlements in the second category (autonomy) and the third category (residence and citizenship) will be under the sovereignty of a Palestinian state, and thus it will not be necessary to “pay” for them with territory west of the Green Line.
Nevertheless, there is a decided possibility of friction and clashes between the enclaves and their Palestinian surroundings, which could develop into a state of high intensity open conflict. Many experts believe that from political, security, and practical aspects, the idea is not at all feasible, even in a state of full peace.
In 2000 President Bill Clinton called upon the sides to think not only about borders and sovereignty, but also about creative, long term territorial arrangements. Under conditions of a permanent status solution, the possibility exists that agreement can be reached on the idea presented here.
__________________________________
Prof. Gideon Biger teaches historical geography and political geography at the Department of Geography and the Human Environment at Tel Aviv University.
Gilead Sher is a senior research fellow at INSS.
I find Yamit’s and Ted’s ideas very interesting. But how does Jerusalem fit into this? Having seen the terrible grey snake of destruction on the line which divided Jerusalem, I felt it was vital that it should never again be divided.
The putative two-state solution, no solution at all, was dead before it was born. Let it rest in peace. In part, the solution lies in recommendations offered by Dr. Martin Sherman of Hebrew University. Judea an Samaria were, are and always will be an integral part of Israel.
The aggregate that forms what some refer to as the GOI, is well on its way to attempt to commencing mega disengagement. But the good news is that actions in that direction will fall flat. In spite of all the hooplah and noise, there is little popular support for such actions.
I am optimistic that Netanyahu’s speechster show is nearing its end.
israel and yesha free of arabs is the only just solution to the “palestinian problem”
throw the dirty self-proclaimed bustards out! don’t forget to send with them all their friends – the leftist scam.
yamit82 Said:
I agree that moving towards another entiry makes sense. Mainly because Israel does not want YS. The problem is how does Israel withdraw, when is this separate state created. I don’t see that Israel can just withdraw and create a state in its place that does not give self determination to the arabs. If Israel withdraws and leaves nothing and the UN comes in immediately the UN will create an entity which favors the west bank higher arab population. The other problem is that a massive amount of jews need to be settled. The UN would not do this on its own even though international law requires it. The only way I see that a massive amount of jews can be settled with a valid legal argument is that Israel states it has no interest in the west bank as did Jordan and does not settle Israeli citizens(this will remove the gc arguments). Israel states however that it will not leave until a satisfactory govt or administration is put into place which carries out the goals of the mandate and protects the legal rights of world jewry west of the jordan. In this way it cannot be taken to court under the GC, its legal justification would be that the immediate establishment of a pal state would obstruct and preclude global jewry’s rights and that until there is a UN aadmin which guarantees those rights Israel will remain in occupation for the purpose of fulfilling the mandate. By doing it this way it can undertake to embark on massive jewish settlement and no one can claim GC violation if it is not israelis. In fact Orthodox Israeli Jews could give up their Israeli citizenship and move there with the purpose to create a torah state or to wait for the messiah. If not there are still a lot of jews in the world and jewish settlement from the diaspora could be funded which would not create the GC argument. There are similarities to your idea but it is in the practical and legal details that it needs working out. Any legal action against it would take years and I don’t see how non Israeli settlement of jews and non territorial claims of Israel could be dealt with legally. Jews have been specifically endowed with these internationally binding legal rights and once the state of Israels is removed from the argument there is no legal argument. I have never heard any legal argument proposed by detractors which deals with the rights of jews as opposed to the rights of Israelis. This is because they know they have no legal argument if Israel is out of the picture. Israel will not need to negotiate with anyone, it puts the shoe on the other foot while moving speedily ahead to settle jews.
Bernard Ross Said:
Yes, no doubt if for no other reason that everyone in Judea has close friends and relatives in Israel and how would it look if they didn’t?
Maybe at first until they get used to the idea and Israel maintains her posture of no responsibility or control over non citizens of Israel.
Israel even by agreeing to negotiate giving up Land and the creation of a foreign sovereignty has given up any rights except demands for secure borders and restrictions that are non enforceable as to the nature and character of the Arab State. The whole idea of Judea is to ensure a Jewish presence with the knowledge that they will be attacked and in suppressing those attacks extend the Jewish territory by force of arms. As more Jews join them they can petition the UN for recognition as an autonomy. Arabs keep attacking the Jews of Judea extend their holdings and in this manner the Jews regain all of Y&S without a sizable Arab population.
Once Israel leaves the West Bank they have no authority, jurisdiction or rights for Lands they relinquish to the Palis. My hypothesis is based on post Israeli withdrawal from all or most of Y&S. The Arabs won’t attack Israel not when they believe they have vulnerable Jews living amongst them. My hypothesis is predicated on constant warfare of Jews repelling attacks and going where possible on the offense.
I see having to fight for the land again in all that entails re: Blood and tears is the only way left to us to regain what our stupid leaders have all but given away already.
@ Bernard Ross:
A precondition is that Jews with Israeli citizenship give it up and become essentially stateless. Israel takes a page out of Jordan giving up any legal jurisdiction over the West Bank and the Arabs living there, but in reverse. A- under international Law Israel cannot remove those who are not their own legal nationals. B- The UN will have to assume responsibility for their protection and welfare. C-There is no doubt that Israel will aid Judea both economically and defensibly were it required. D- most of the male residents of Judea are IDF Elite combat vets with a high % of officers. Israel would withdraw but not before equipping those who stay with sufficient weapons and ammo.
Israel presents a face, policy and image the world demands and the settlers of Judea become the villains, no longer under the control and authority of the Government of Israel. Arafat claimed he could not control the terrorists, Abbas can’t control Hamas and Israel can’t control Judea. Whether the world buys the division or not Israel has a built in case of denial of all actions by the Jews of Judea. They can even condemn the Jewish Judeans. Probably at some future time Israel and Judea will confederate.
If the Palis can have three distinct political sovereignty’s Why shouldn’t the Jews have two or even three as well?
Jews Living Under Arab rule would never work out! Has anyone referenced the Arab lands the Jews used to live in before proposing this. A Seriously questionable idea. Arabs living under Arab rule does not even work for the most part!
Israel needs to be a united country of all Jews whatever flavor or tribe. No withdrawls anymore ever again! Annex Area C of Judah and Samaria.
Many more people will be willing to move there when it is annexed and the people living their can stop feeling insecure about having to possibly move out or listen to sugggestions like living under Arab rule. This A FIRST STEP!
Area A&B will need creative solutions which do not need to be rushed. The danger of annexing A&B with all its Arab inhabitants is a risk that can not be taken so quickly. Even if you are in favor it you must realize this could turn out to be a disastor. Certainly only minority of Israelis would be for this. It will be hard enough to get the Knesset Annex Area C.
yamit82 Said:
would Israels secular jews and the west defend them?
yamit82 Said:
Wouldn’t world continue to blame all jews anyway?
I can see a separate jewish nation but if it were to occur practically I beleive it can be done in a continued Israeli occupation of the land on the basis of protecting the internationally guaranteed rights of jews to settle west of the jordan river. Israel can forego any claims to territory without giving up occupation. In this way Israel distances itself from the arguments of an expansionist Israel seeking territory or as a border negotiation. Rather it portrays itself, like the british mandate, as the benign neutral administrator who is merely there to facilitate the fulfillment of international law regarding jewish settlement west of the jordan river. It could even under law create an affirmative action policy to speed up settlement by giving land grants to non israeli diaspora jews so as to avoid arguments of settling Israeli citizens. when there are enough jews to fulfill the original mandate goals the state of Israel can withdraw and the residents of YS can form their own state.
If Jews cannot reside in “palestine” then why allow arabs/musliims to reside in Israel? a JEW FREE palestine neccessitates a MUSLIM FREE Israel. No more double standards please. Whoever rules the west bank is still obligated in international law to “..encourage the close settlement of the Jewish people west of the Jordan River” did this imperative expire, was it rescinded? It is my view that the state of Israel has no legal right to claim agency for the Jewish people for the sole purpose of preventing and obstructing the Jewish people of their only legal interest west of the Jordan River.
I do not see how a Pal state can legally be created in international law if it is in conflict with the right of jewish settlement. Israel should remain as occupier in order to facilitate and protect jewish settlement in international law because a pal state has already stated it will be JEW FREE and would not observe the facilitation of jewish settlement imperative.. When there are enough Jews the mandate would be fulfilled and Israel can then withdraw if it wishes to leave the YS Jews to decide their future relations with the YS arabs.
Jews Living Under Arab rule never work out! Idiotic idea of the first order. Arabs living under Arab rule does not even work for the most part!
Israel needs to be a united country of all Jews whatever flavor or tribe. No withdrawls anymore ever again! Annex Area C of Judah and Samaria.
Many more people will be willing to move there when it is annexed and the people living their can stop feeling insecure about having to possibly move out or listen to crap like living under Arab rule. This A FIRST STEP!
Area A&B will need creative solutions which do not need to be rushed. The danger of annexing A&B with all its Arab inhabitants is a risk that can not be taken so quickly. Even if you are in favor it you must realize this could turn out to be a disastor. Certainly only minority of Israelis would be for this. It will be hard enough to get the Knesset Annex Area C.
@ yamit82:
Yamit, I like your TSS, if it has to be two states, this is the solution that makes sense.
@ Robert_K:
Maybe the INSS should write a paper on the relative merits of Israel’s death by hanging vs. death by firing squad, since she would have no choice in the matter. After all, it would be “required” of her by a legitimate, impartial international body, or so the INSS would have her believe.
Love the George Orwell quote! He was very prescient.
How’d that work out for us in Warsaw and Lodz?
A Decent Proposal!!
The Jewish State of Judea
In ancient times, two Jewish entities, Israel and later Galilee, formed an economically viable, cosmopolitan Jewish state. Judea, centered in the barren hills, was content with a subsistence economy, jealously guarded Jewish religion, and Jewish national consciousness. In our time, Jewish history repeats itself. Israeli zealots flock to Jewish settlements, where the priority is not economic development but preserving certain ideological goals and values—which many Jews do not share. Jews’ military and fiscal obligations to Israel are also different. Everything is in place for a split of Israel into two Jewish States.
Judea would encompass the contested Palestinian territories, with the aim of eventual Jewish expansion into Sinai and all of Eretz Israel. Although Judea would not be economically self-sustaining in industry as Israel, Judea would get the lion’s share of material support that pours into Israel from Jewish people around the world. Jews of Judea could defend themselves against Arabs without great expense and depend on Israel and the West for last-resort protection against major Arab aggression.
Being a profoundly religious Jewish state offers Judea advantages in confrontation with Arabs which the secular Israeli nation does not possess. Judea would be free to clear out Arab indigenous inhabitants. Following Jewish biblical guidelines, Judea could use military measures otherwise unacceptable in the modern world.
Judea can forget the notion of civil rights and obey Jewish religious law. Unlike Israel, Judea can afford to stop non-Jewish immigration, directly or through inter-marriage of Jews with gentiles, and limit non-Jewish Orthodox conversions and other Jewish Reform practices, which, though compatible with modern secular values, significantly water down the Jewish religious identity.
Judea could become a classic Jewish theocracy, organized along the lines of pre-kingdom Israel ruled by the judges, giving rabbis in Judea the judicial functions of the late Second Temple period onward. Judea could use Talmudic Jewish law, updated to accommodate present reality of Jewish life, instead of contemporary Israeli legislation.
Israel could withdraw from the contested Palestinian territories, enjoy peace with Israel’s Arab neighbors, and concentrate on rapid economic development of the Jewish state. That would win Jews some international respect. Israel could become the dominant Middle Eastern economy, replacing Switzerland, the United States, and Russia as the source of financial, technological, and military commodities and services to Muslims. Western powers will not compete with Israel for hegemony in a Middle East plunged in incessant wars between Arabs after Muslims lose the common Jewish enemy.
Relieving Israel of her war expenditures will let Israel work to recapture Jewish prominence in banking and trade, fundamental research and technology, and the arts. Dividing Israel into two states, Israel and Judea, would not cause enmity among Jews, rather would eliminate the enmity currently brewing in Israel where whatever policy Israeli government chooses displeases about half the Jewish population. The division of Israel would let both Israel and Judea “specialize” and limit their liability. Israel would not be responsible for Judea’s expansionism, while Judea, financed by Israeli Jews, might disregard the economic consequences of its decisions.
Throughout history, anti-Semites have used the actions of a few Jews, from Zealots to tavern-keepers, to incriminate all Jews. Today all Jews are accused of maltreating Palestinians. Creating Judea would let Israelis shift the blame from the Jewish nation to a Jewish state which pays no attention to gentile opinion. Israel, which would have almost no problems with Palestinians, would become a good neighbor of Muslims.
Regarding Whether Jewish enclaves remain in a Palestinian state or whether there should be a Palestinian state on the “West Bank”:
George Orwell