Israel's 'Berlin Wall' Threatens to Imprison the West Bank

“It is eight metres high and up to 220 miles long – and, say Palestinians, it is part of a blatant plan to seize their assets and force them off their land. Jessica McCallin in Jerusalem reports”

Fears mount as Israel’s ‘Berlin Wall’ threatens to imprison the West Bank](http://www.sundayherald.com/30424) Sunday Herald, UK

It makes the Berlin Wall look like the work of amateurs. Israel is building a barricade in and around the occupied Palestinian West Bank which will be four times the size of communist Germany’s claim to fame – and light years ahead of it technologically. The eight-metre-high wall is made out of huge, grey, concrete slabs and has watchtowers built into it every 300 metres or so. On either side of it are military roads, complete with tanks and armoured Jeeps, trenches, some six metres wide and four metres deep, barbed wire, cameras, motion sensors, electrified fencing and exclusion zones of between 35 and 50 metres. In parts, special material will be laid to detect infiltrators’ footprints. In all it is about 100 metres wide and has been and will continue to be built entirely on Palestinian land.

It’s difficult to say exactly how long the finished wall will be as Israel has not released complete maps. Israeli and Palestinian human rights organisations have had to deduce its path using military orders for land seizures and lists of which illegal Israeli settlements will be to the west of the wall. Their conclusion is that it will run the entire 220-mile length of the West Bank and could even encircle it and be built not just on the border between the West Bank and Israel, but on the border between the West Bank and Jordan as well, effectively making the West Bank a huge open-air prison .

It will not be a straight wall. It will twist and turn, jutting, at times, tens of miles into the West Bank to include settlement clusters and corridors. Huge walled arms are expected to punch deep into the occupied territory, especially around the holy cities of Nablus and Hebron which have been settled by extremist, religious Jews. Nor will it follow the green line, the 1949 armistice line between Israel and the Arab states which now delineates Israel and the West Bank and – according to the Palestinians – should be used as the basis of a border between and independent Palestine and Israel.

Around Jerusalem, a 54km stretch is expected to be positively acrobatic. Since 1967 Israel has peppered East Jerusalem and the land to its east with settlements, breaking continuity between Palestinian built-up areas, preventing their expansion and cutting them off from the rest of the West Bank. To include as many of the settlements as possible in Israel and exclude as many of the Palestinians as possible, the wall will have to do a series of spectacular twists and bends .

Its first phase, the 70-mile-long northern part of the wall has been under construction since July. To date, 15 Palestinian villages have found themselves stuck between the wall and the green line and a further 15 villages have found themselves cut off from their farm land, now on the ‘Israeli’ side of the wall, and thus their livelihoods and way of life. In one area, a contiguous 90sqkm has already been seized. Homes have been demolished and farmland destroyed to make way for the wall.

Hundreds of homes in Palestinian towns such as Qalqiliya and Tulkarem now look out on the wall and have its cameras look into their rooms. Qalqiliya will be surrounded by the wall on three sides. The only entrance into and out of the town is an Israeli-manned checkpoint, one metre wide for pedestrians and about five metres wide for cars. This is supposed to allow normal thoroughfare to Qalqiliya’s 42,000 residents and the 45,000 residents from surrounding villages that depend on the town for hospitals, schools, shopping and other services.

Israel says it will allow free access in and out of the checkpoint, but an hour spent observing it showed this will almost certainly not happen. Countless people were turned away, in particular those from the nearby village of Jayyous which has been very active in campaigning against the wall and has attracted a lot of international media attention. Others were kept for up to one hour for no reason.

Why? ‘Because I feel like it,’ says the checkpoint’s commander, Erez Kalderon. ‘I’m allowed to keep them for as long as I feel.’ Getting past the checkpoint is so difficult that an estimated 2000 Qalqiliyan businessmen have already left the city for villages on the other side of the checkpoint.

And the reason for the wall, which is costing well over $2 billion in total? For Israel, the justification is the same as that used for all its actions: security. It is building the wall, which it calls a security or separation fence, to prevent the entry into Israel of militants and suicide-bombers. Government spokespeople will not expand on this argument nor explain why so many settlements and so much land is to be annexed. Palestinians dismiss the argument.

‘If it’s really for security then why not build it on the green line, why take my land?’ says Maa’rouf Zahran, Mayor of Qalqiliya Municipality. ‘And why does the wall need to be up to 100m wide? Why can’t it just be 10m wide, but higher. Surely the higher it is, the more security it provides.’

**The wall, which Palestinians call the Apartheid Wall, may in part be to try and foil attacks, some say, but that’s not the real reason for it. To them, it’s just the continuation of a policy of land expropriation and population expulsion which started with Israel’s establishment more than 54 years ago.

‘The real reason for the wall is to take as much Palestinian land and water resources and annex as many of the settlements as possible. Current estimates say it will take as much as 10% of the West Bank, including its most fertile land, and the whole of the western mountain aquifer, situated under the green line, which supplies the West Bank Palestinians with over 50% of their water,’ says Jamal Juma of the Palestinian Environmental NGO Network and a key campaigner against the wall. ‘Once the wall is up it will cripple Palestinian agriculture and economic activity, and turn the West Bank into a series of disconnected, dependent entities or Bantustans. It will make life unlivable and cause the Palestinians to leave which is what Israel, currently clamouring for transfer or ethnic cleansing, wants.’**

It took nearly three decades for the Berlin Wall to come down. Palestinians are afraid that if their wall is up for that long its impact will force them to leave their homes. Israel will call this ‘voluntary transfer’, implying Palestinians wanted to leave when in reality they had no option. When the wall finally comes down, they say, it will not be to reunite people and land – it will be because the land east of it is now free of its native inhabitants and ready to be completely taken over by Israel.

If it keeps the suicide bombers out and brings both parties back to the negotiating table instead, it helps everyone.

Political Analysts believe the real motives behind this prison style wall is to destroy any chances of a unified Palestinian State from taking shape.. the wall is another aspect to the ethnic cleansing policy of the Israeli authorities. :nook:

This is by no means ethnic-cleansing. It is horrible, vile and pure evil. However it is not ethnic cleansing. Rwanda is an example of ethnic cleansing, Angola as well, though many describe that as a civil war gone very very wrong.

The actions of the present Israeli government are not pro-peace, rather they are towards creating a large gap between the two parties. With the current US internal and external policies, Israel now has a free hand to do what it wishes and when it wishes. The act is deplorable and in violation of any good faith that existed between the two parties.

Lets remember one thing, that this is not a middle eastern dispute, unlike what the media might tell us. It is purely a Israeli and Palestinian dispute, where Israel is the strong party that is enforcing laws and acts that would not be acceptable anywhere else in the world. One wall went down, i guess another can come up somewhere else.

Ask the people who are directly effected by the Israeli occupation... from the article "To them, it's just the continuation of a policy of land expropriation and population expulsion which started with Israel's establishment more than 54 years ago." another words it is regarded as ethnic cleansing.

Dil he Pakistani it is not ethnic cleansing. If the israelis were on a rampage and killing all Palestinians in site, that would be ethnic cleansing. They are not. The Israelis are too smart for that. Rather they are creating anger and hatred, and then when there are suicide bombings, they use the International media to fuel the bad image of the Palestinian people.

Under UN, International law and even the ICC charter, what you call ethnic cleansing, is not ethnic cleansing. Rather it is a deliberate and extremely clever method of forcing the Palestinian people to use methods which are abhored on the international scene.

If we wish to continue this discussion, could you please explain how you define ethnic cleansing.

Lol… “if we wish to continue this discussion” :nook:

Israel’s approved ethnic cleansing](http://jerusalem.indymedia.org/news/2002/09/71809.php) Indymedia

Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians has always presented a moral problem to the West, as that treatment has violated every law and moral standard on the books. Some 750,000 Palestinians were driven from their homes in 1948-1949, and since then scores of thousands more have been pushed out by force, their houses demolished or taken over by Israeli Jews (not Israeli Arabs).

Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing](http://www.munfw.org/archive/50th/4th1.htm) United Nations (Model)

**Genocide: The deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.

Ethnic Cleansing: The elimination of an unwanted group from a society, as by genocide or forced migration.**

It seems i lost my post due to the unusual settings this forum has. However here is the jist of what i had to say again. I would like to use the UN definitions for genocide and ethnic-cleansing. However you have not provided those. Rather you have used a defintion from a “Model United Nations” which consists of college and high school students.

The official definition of Genocide can be found in the 1948 Genocide Convention which can be found here: Redirecting...

As for ethnic-cleansing, I believe there is no official UN definition or a distinction between the definition of Genocide. The two are used interchangably. The convention defines genocide in the second article which states:

**

**

According to international norms and practices, all 5 subclauses of Article 2 must be violated for a claim of genocide to be accepted. Israel has violated subclauses A and B on numerous occasions. However the other three are debatable depending on which side of the issue you stand. Subclauses D and E have not be violated, while C is highly debatable.

This was the case in Rwanda and Kosovo. This is not the case in Palestine. I do wish to point out that neither the Arab nations including the PLO nor the resistance groups like Hamas et al. make a claim of genocide against the Israeli government.

Also there are some characteristics which are used in evaluating the claim that are not within the scope of the definition of 1948 Genocide Convention. These are more subjective assessments of brutality and the scope of devestation.

Im well aware of the legal definition of Genocide, ive already posted a thread about it in world affairs..

As for the model UN definition even though its from a Education institute, the article states the definitions were taken from official sources including the UN. Incidently in the article it quotes:

"The U.S. State Department, in a recent report on Kosovo, concluded that ethnic cleansing "generally entails the systematic and forced removal of members of an ethnic group from their communities to change the ethnic composition of a region." The latter definition, while accurate for that particular situation, is seemingly too narrow to be a useful descriptor of a majority of situations which are encompassed in the broader definition. Ethnic cleansing, then, may involve death or displacement, or any combination thereof, where a population is identified for removal from an area."

Dil he Pakistani, the article can say what it wishes, after all it is not an official document of the United Nations. Rather something a student has written and thus cannot be acceptable as an official definition of Genocide and/or Ethnic-Cleansing. It would be foolhardy to choose a 1 line definition of Genocide when a complete convention exists which UN member states have ratified. That is not the case with this "Model United Nations" paper.

So shall we move on to the discussion on whether Israel is committing genocide?

IB, this thread is about the Berlin Style Wall being erected to encircle Palestinian lands and how this is considered by many analysts as another tool to ethnic cleanse the occupied territories of Palestinians… Lets look back at the history of Israels ethnic cleansing policy in the West Bank.

PALESTINE: Israel covers up ethnic cleansing](http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2002/491/491p10.htm) Green Left Weekly, Australia BY ROHAN PEARCE May 8, 2002.

“It should be clear to us that there is no room in Palestine for these two peoples. No `development’ will bring us to our goal of independent nationhood in this small country. Without the Arabs, the land will become wide and spacious for us; with the Arabs, the land will remain sparse and cramped.” These were the words that Joseph Weitz, director of the Zionist Jewish National Fund, wrote in his diary in 1940. Weitz added: “The only solution is Palestine, at least western Palestine, without Arabs. There is no room here for compromises!.. The way is to transfer the Arabs from here to the neighbouring countries, all of them, except perhaps those from Bethlehem, Nazareth and the Old City of Jerusalem.”

**The post-March 29 rampage by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) in the West Bank, most notably in Jenin, is the latest chapter in the history of “transfer” — the attempt to force out Palestinians out of their national homeland.

During the attacks on Palestinian towns, the IDF carried out the systematic destruction of Palestinian governmental infrastructure. In the West Bank city of Ramallah, for example, IDF armoured personnel carriers and tanks smashed down the gates of the Palestinian Ministry of Education and about 150 Israeli soldiers systematically destroyed computer equipment and removed records, money and cheque books. Similar deliberate destruction was carried out at the Palestinian Legislative Council, the finance, health and civil affairs ministries, the Palestine Central Bureau of Statistics and the El-Bireh Municipal Library.

Israeli soldiers also vandalised the offices of the human rights organisations such as al Haq, the MATTIN Group and the Mandela Institute; the Health Development Information Policy Unit; the Union of Medical Relief Committees and the al Nahda Women’s Society for the Hearing Impaired. The al Quds University Educational Television station and other Palestinian media outlets were also vandalised.**

Although Israeli government spokespersons have previously said that the plan of “transfer” openly advocated by the right-wing members of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s cabinet is “unfeasible”, in practice Sharon’s government is destroying the ability of Palestinians to live and work in Palestine. Israel’s blocking of a United Nations “fact-finding” mission to Jenin was motivated not just by the need to cover up the massacre of Palestinian civilians committed there by the IDF, but to prevent interference in its current effort to force Palestinians out of the Occupied Territories.

Zionist ethnic cleansing
The Zionist policy of attempting to ethnically cleanse Palestine of its indigenous inhabitants has a long history. In May 1948 the Zionists proclaimed the State of Israel as the homeland for the world’s Jews. In 1947 Jews had formed less than a third of Palestine’s population. Even within the portion of Palestine allocated by the 1947 UN partition plan to the “Jewish state”, Arabs were the majority. Zionists claim that the Arabs’ rejection of the partition plan means that the Palestinian Arabs have only themselves to blame for the further seizure of land by Israel between 1948 and 1949 (and, additionally in 1967).

At the time the UN approved the partition plan, Ireland’s President Eamon De Valera told a person soliciting his support for the plan: “I read the Old Testament many years ago. I am afraid I have forgotten many things I read; but one passage I recall clearly. It is the story of Solomon’s judgement of the two women who desired the same baby. I remember how when Solomon ruled that the baby be divided the real mother screamed, `No! No! Give the baby to the other woman!’ That is my answer to partition. The rightful owners of a country will never agree to partition.”

Zionists also claim that Palestinians would not have been evicted from their homes in the 1948-49 “war on independence” had neighbouring Arab states not fought with Israel (in fact, these states, which were backed by Britain, attempted to seize Palestine for themselves). But already by 1948, there were 300,000 Palestinian refugees from Israel.

Dozens of Arab villages were destroyed by the time of Israel’s formal establishment on May 14, 1948. In April 1948, 254 Palestinian civilians were massacred in the village of Deir Yassin (29 kilometres beyond the borders allocated by the UN to Israel) with the authorisation of the Zionist military organisation, the Haganah.

**Chaim Weizmann, Israel’s first president, made it clear that the remaining Palestinians were not wanted in Israel, writing in his autobiography that he wanted Israel to be as “Jewish as England is English”. Ha’aretz reported in 1958 that Israel’s first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, “refused an identity card issued to him because it was written in Arabic as well as Hebrew”.

Immediately after the 1948 war, almost 400,000 hectares of Palestinian land was confiscated by the Israeli state. Between 1948 and 1976, an additional 110,000 hectares were taken.**

The early confiscations of land were “legal” for “security reasons”, because a state of emergency was declared on May 21, 1948. These measures were allowed by the Defence (Emergency) Regulations, enacted in 1945 by the British colonial authorities. The Israeli government’s powers were increased by the Law and Administration Ordinance, which allowed “defence areas” to be arbitrarily declared by the defence minister.

Ya’acov Shimshon Shapiro, who later became Israel’s attorney-general and “justice” minister, said of these regulations in 1946: “The system established in Palestine since the issue of the defence laws is unparalleled in any civilised society; there are no such laws even in Nazi Germany.”

The manner in which these laws were used to expel Palestinians from their homes is illustrated by the case of Kafr Birim, a village in northern Galilee. David Gilmour writes in Dispossessed: The Ordeal of the Palestinians, that in 1948: “After the fighting in Galilee was over, Kafr Birim was occupied by the Israeli army. A few days later the inhabitants were informed that they would have to leave their homes temporarily as military operations were expected in their area. They were reluctant to do this and only moved to some nearby caves after a promise from an official at the Ministry of Police and Minorities that they would soon be allowed to return home. This promise was repeated a few months later by the Arab affairs.”

**After three years, the villagers took their case to Israel’s Supreme Court and received a ruling in their favour. The army ignored the ruling and, in September 1953, the army "mined the village and ordered the Israeli air force to drop incendiary bombs”. “Every building was destroyed except the church. Most of the land was given to the recently established Kibbutz Birim, the rest to a moshav settlement of Iranian Jews.” **

Israel’s June 1967 war against Syria, Egypt and Jordan allowed the Zionist state to push its borders outward dramatically, taking over the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Palestinians who had already been turned into refugees were forced to flee once more. Paul Gauthier cites the example of Kalkiliya in Jerusalem et le Sang des Pauvres 5-8 juin 1967: “A large proportion of the 16,000 inhabitants of Kalkiliya were refugees from 1948. With the aid of UNWRA [United Nations Relief and Works Agency] they had built their own homes and started a new life. Having driven the inhabitants out of their town by 16.00 hours on 7 July 1967, the Israeli army used tanks and bulldozers to destroy two-thirds of the town. …

Following Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, an investigation into atrocities committed was undertaken by an international commission of six jurists, led by co-founder of Amnesty International Sean MacBride. The findings, supported by the majority of the jurists, found that Israel was guilty of attempted “ethnocide” and “genocide” of the Palestinian people and that there were no valid reasons “under international law for its invasion of Lebanon, for the manner in which it conducted hostilities, or for its actions as an occupying force”.

The most recent Israeli assault on Palestinian towns in the Occupied Territories represents an acceleration of this policy of ethnic cleansing — trying to wipe out any Palestinian resistance and destroying the limited social infrastructure. In the case of the Jenin refugee camp, the IDF almost completely levelled Palestinian residential areas — a clear signal from Sharon for Palestinians to leave and seek refuge outside the borders of pre-Israel Palestine.

**Sharon made clear his view on a Palestinian state in 1982, in an interview with Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci. He said that Palestinians “have a homeland — it is the Palestine that is called Jordan”. ** This week Sharon will present US President George Bush with a “peace plan”. On May 3, Sharon said: “I’ll be presenting a plan, a serious plan, maybe the most serious that has presented by now, how to reach peace in the Middle East, how to reach peace between us and the Palestinians.”

Sharon’s “serious plan” is to permanently station Israeli troops within the borders of the West Bank to create a “buffer zone”, and thus to ethnically cleanse more Palestinians from Palestinian land.