Zionist Potential Annexation of Brthlehem (26)

Meeting Minutes: 4th Plenary Meeting on Territory – March 31, 2008, 2:45 pm

Summary

 
Members of this meeting discussed the potential Israeli annexation of the area southwest of Bethlehem (the Etzion bloc) and minimizing the number of Palestinians living in this territory. Despite the settlement freeze, Israeli members of the committee argued that they were not building new settlements, but rather building upon what is already theirs in Jerusalem and within the blocs, which they believed was sufficient to meet their Roadmap obligations.
Khaled Elgindy (Negotiations Support Unit, Palestinian Authority): When you say tunnels, would you consider connecting your settlements with the same kind of tunnels that you propose – and are actually building on the ground – for Palestinian villages that are separated?
Dani Tirza (Israeli official): Yes. We can consider
Elgindy: So why aren’t you connecting them using tunnels? Why take empty land to connect the settlements?
Tirza: Because we have security concerns. Tunnels are present a security concern. We don’t frighten you…
Nizar Farsakh (PA): Well, we beg to differ on this with you.
Elgindy: You should ask the people in Gaza and in these villages whether they are frightened of you or your settlers.

Full text

Attendees:
Palestinian: Dr. Samih Al-Abed [SA], Khaled Elgindy [KE], Nizar Farsakh [NF] and     
Fouad Hallak [FH]
Israeli:          Udi Dekel [UD], Dani Tirza [DT] and Leah Arad [LA]
Overview:

  • The Israeli side presented their ideas on the area southwest of Bethlehem (the Etzion bloc) that they want to annex and the criteria they used in drawing the line: number of settlers, security, topography, road connection, land use (agriculture, commercial, industrial, tourism, infrastructure, recreation, schools transportation) and minimizing the number of Palestinians included and the overall effect on Palestinians in the area. They said it was approximately 54 km2 in size and contains some 49,000 settlers. They said they are flexible on the delineation of the bloc and are not taking an ‘all or nothing’ approach to the issue.
  • The Israeli side continued to insist on deferring Jerusalem and the eastern border and restated that they reject approaching modifications to the border on a reciprocal basis insisting that they are not giving back something that is ours.
  • On contiguity they agreed that it is important for both sides but they argued that tunnels and underpasses should be used to provide contiguity to Palestinians not to Israelis because tunnels present a security risk and the risk to the Israelis is always greater. They also suggested that they would not consider isolated settlements that are deep in the West Bank.
  • In terms of the settlement freeze they argued that they are not building “new settlements”, but only in Jerusalem and the blocs, which they believe is sufficient to meet their Roadmap obligations. They followed this with a thinly veiled threat that in the event that current negotiations do not succeed, they will resume settlement construction everywhere else as well.
  • In the next meeting, the Israeli side will explain the rest of the “settlement blocs” and the other areas they are interested in. There is concern that the Israeli side is trying to drag out the process and procrastinate.

 
Meeting Minutes (not verbatim):
NOTE:     Text in square brackets is either an interpretation (in regular text) or a description (in italics) of what was being said. 
UD:     Last time we spoke a little about “areas of settlement”; I’m not saying “blocs”. We would like to explain to you our position, what we mean by those areas so that you understand better what we mean when we say “settlement area”. So we have prepared a presentation with maps. Like last time we mentioned the Etzion area; we are going to present to you what is Etzion.
SA:      we are ready to listen.
DT:      [Projects  a map of Etzion bloc using ArcMap software and begins describing the various lines and colors, adding layers as he speaks.] This is the reference line, or whatever you want to call it [points to their ‘West Bank Outline’ line]. And this is the line of the settlement area, the area where all the big settlements sit on one part of the land [points to line delineating bloc]. These are not exact lines, but just to give an idea. We can later define it accurately, but for now we are using straight lines. The green lines are the major roads which are used by Israelis and connect them to Jerusalem. All their services are in Jerusalem.
The main road here is Road #60. But we have a problem there. It goes close to Khader and that presents a security problem. We have 49,000 Israelis living in this area with only one road connecting them, which has a security problem. So we have to use another road as an alternative [points to Road #367 which runs south of Etzion] that goes to Beit Shemesh. Betar ‘Illit is using another road that goes north [points to Road #375]. Most people in Betar ‘Illit work in Jerusalem; their life is in Jerusalem.
There are also many agricultural villages that have a connection between them for day to day life. This polygon [referring to entire bloc] is 1% of the land [i.e., the West Bank] as it is approximately 54 km2. There are no Palestinian villages in this area. There are some Palestinians living in the area, but it is not a village. It is only a small hamlet, Khallet Zakariya, and some lonely houses for agriculture.
FH:      You know there is an old man living there. He is more than 100 years old.
DT:      Yes, I know him. Very nice man. But I don’t want to talk about history because if I start we will stay here forever. I like history a lot.
[Adds layer of settlement built-up area] This is the urban area: houses already built or under construction, not the planned areas. We can show you the plans later. Because we believe settlements in the area have to have natural growth.
[Adds  layer of areas that have approved plans] All these are the ones that have permission to build, so they can build on it if they secure the money for it.
[Adds layer of municipal areas] This is the municipal area; you can see some of it does not have planned areas in it. This is the area from which taxes can be collected and where people can build if they get permission from the authorities.
But if we’re talking about settlements in an area we also have to talk about security. So this line shows the 500 meters from the current built-up area, from the last house [adds layer showing 500 m buffer zone around built-up area of each settlement], only what is already built. This is the security area. If Palestinians live within that area we can do nothing about it, we cannot move them. Note, I did not make a security area [i.e., 500 m buffer] for the settlement area as a whole, but we have to consider that. 
We also have to consider the use of the land: agriculture, commercial, tourist industrial, recreational [adds layers showing each designation]. You also have electricity and water infrastructure.
So now you are going to ask me, ‘what about these areas without any land use designation’? [points to the remaining area in the bloc that does not have any land use designation]. Well, we need to make connections. We need to have continuity in this area, so they are not isolated from each other. The lines marked are not exact; we can define them on the ground later. We tried to minimize the Palestinians within this area. Here you see the connection of the area to the rest of Israel and to Jerusalem. [points to area on map] Here you can see this land; we know it is [Palestinian] agricultural land, so we kept it out. We try to minimize the amount of land taken for the corridor connecting Gush Etzion to Jerusalem.
Here you see an illegal outpost [points to Neve Daniel North (Sde Bo’az)] . I know you say all are illegal, but to us this one is illegal and we do not consider it in our area, only legal settlements.
UD:     So the outposts are not drawing the map.
DT:      But we have a problem about connecting Betar ‘Illit with Jerusalem. The main problem in this area is Wadi Fukin because it is an enclave between Beitar Illit and Tzur Hadassa. We don’t want to put any Palestinians in this area. There is a road connecting it to Husan so we exclude it from Gush Etzion.  There are 49,000 Israelis live in this area, and some Israelis come from outside to study here also.  It is about 1% of the West Bank.
SA:      It’s less than 1%, right?
DT:      Yes, less than 1%.
UD:     [jokingly] We are not allowed to say percentage.
SA:      How many settlements are in this area?
DT:      About 10—I don’t know all the names, but it’s not… one minute [adds layer showing settlement names, 9 in all]. There is another one that you don’t see here. It is Geva’ot. It is not a settlement. It’s like a…
NF:      A nahal?
DT:      … a big school.
LA:      A school or place of study, an educational center.
DT:      No, it was a nahal. Now it’s an educational center.
SA:      You have another line there on the map. There is a separate area there with empty land [points to area of the bloc extending northwards along Road 60]. What is it?
DT:      For security; we need to protect the road. We need height to control the area. It dominates the road so we need to secure it.
UD:     This area is connected to Jerusalem.
SA:      Everything in the West Bank is connected to Jerusalem—even Jenin.
UD:     Yes, and by the same road. If you want to connect Jenin with [MISSING].
SA:      One question about security: will these areas be part of Israel?
UD:     Yes, we need to secure the area. We would like it to see it with Israel.
SA:      We want to understand this issue of security. On the other side of the line, is there security concerns there too?
UD:     Yes, of course. We need to protect our citizens from some terrorist and extremist groups that do not want peace and want to attack us.
SA:      But we will have peace. We are talking after the agreement.
UD:     We talked for many years about peace but people tried to destroy it and in 2000 started violence against us.
SA:      ok, you can move them to other side and they will be secure.
UD:     But we are speaking about this area. We’re trying to explain to you what we mean by “area of settlement”. It’s not just built-up area, but the whole area they need in order to live. We prepared this to show you an example of the areas we discussed before.
SA:      What areas? Show them to us.
DT:      We are only speaking about one area today.
UD:     The areas we mentioned: this one (Gush Etzion), Modi’in ‘Illit, Shomron/Ariel, and some other areas adjacent to the line.
SA:      That’s what we want to know. Where are those other areas.
UD:     As I told you before, the main idea is that most Israelis―80% of the settlers―to stay where they are, and not to have to move them.
SA:      It is your decision?
UD:     It is our objective. Since 10 years and since 15 years.
SA:      [MISSING]
UD:     80% of the people, not the territory.
SA:      So you’ll keep building more and more, and you will keep asking for the same percentage?
UD:     We would like those people to continue to live in the same kind of community as they are now living.
SA:      OK, and this villages—Husan, Battir and Wadi Fukin—don’t you think they want to live together in the same community?
UD:     Yes. We want to keep contiguity for you as well.
SA:      Nahhalin. How do you connect it to them main road, to Jerusalem and Bethlehem?
DT:      Yes, they have a road to connect them, an underpass or tunnel. So it can access Bethlehem.
KE:      When you say tunnels, would you consider connecting your settlements with the same kind of tunnels that you propose—and are actually building on the ground—for Palestinian villages that are separated?
DT:      Yes. We can consider
KE:      So why aren’t you connecting them using tunnels? Why take empty land to connect the settlements?
DT:      Because we have security concerns. Tunnels are present a security concern.  We don’t frighten you…
NF:      Well, we beg to differ on this with you.
KE:      You should ask the people in Gaza and in these villages whether they are frightened of you or your settlers.
SA:      Think of Nahhalin.
DT:      Well, there are Palestinians in this areas who prefer to be on the Israeli side, but we’re not talking about that now. We have to see the needs of not just Israelis, but of the Palestinians who live there as well.
SA:      What is this purple area outside [points to area designated as municipal area of Efrat but is not included in their line for the bloc]?
DT:      This is Giv’at Eitam. It has an approved plan so they can build on it, but it is not being implemented. We know it is big. We are trying to minimize the impact on people there, so we left it out.
UD:     Let’s say this: if we agree on a line, then this will not be part of the settlement area. But if we don’t, we will continue to build in these areas. But we won’t include it for now. It only signifies that there is permission to build.
SA:      [laughing] So you are blackmailing us now.
KE:      How do you reconcile this with Olmert’s commitment, which he made before the entire international community, to freeze settlement activity?
UD:     This is not a new settlement. We said we will not building any new settlements. But we are not going to wait. We are moving all the time. If we reach an agreement then if it is on our side we will build. But if we don’t reach agreement then we will not stop building; we will continue and proceed. This is why we built a security fence. We did not want to build it at first because we said we need to agree the border with you, but then we decided we cannot wait any more and so we built it. But now that we have a process, we are not going to do anything in this area.
FH:      In Jaba there are no agricultural areas, it is empty land, so why did you include it in the bloc?
DT:      It is not empty. It is for topography. We need it to be able to go from Gush Etzion to the west.
SA:      What is the problem with topography?
DT:      It is too vertical. You can build if it is horizontal, but you cannot built in a vertical area.
SA:      So this justifies that you include it? So even topography is working against us.
KE:      The edge of the area you showed us, at Efrat, is roughly 8km deep into the West Bank. Would you accept a similar intrusion into Israeli territory?
UD:     This is not one of the parameter for us. The parameters are facts on the ground. We have to find ways to deal with that reality. We are not interested in poking you in the eye, or making deep intrusions, like you say. Because this is the situation that exists on the ground, and we need to understand it.
NF:      The point Dr. Samih is making is that that reality is fluid and constantly changing. So how do we deal with it if it keeps changing?
UD:     This reality already exists. One or two more houses will not change that reality. There are areas of what we call national consensus that we will keep. As I said before, if we can’t reach agreement, we’re going to go forward [with building everywhere.].
NF:      So, that’s how you define the freeze: not to build new settlements?
UD:     As Olmert said, we will not build new settlements. But in Jerusalem, and in these areas, we will continue to build for the natural growth of these areas.
KE:      Even though the Roadmap says freeze “all settlement activity, including the natural growth of settlements”? How do you reconcile that?
UD:     When we see you fulfill your Roadmap obligations we can talk about ours. You cannot expect us to move only on our obligations. Until then we will do the same. This is now the facts. My opinion is not important. And I’m sure you know that.
SA:      What is the relation between this line and the wall? Can you overlay the two to see the difference?
DT:      It’s a fence. It’s almost the same.
SA:      Show us.
DT:      [Adds layer of the wall and indicates which sections are completed, planned or have pending court cases. The wall line matches the bloc line in all areas except Jaba’ in the south, which is included in latter but not the former, and in the north from Nahhalin to Walaja. (see attached rendition of Israeli map.)]
SA:      So it’s the same.
DT:      It’s mostly the same, because we took the same considerations [as the wall] when we did this line. It’s a balance between security needs and the rights of the people there.
UD:     As you know, during decisions on the fence, we have to use the principle of proportionality to balance between security and the needs of the people. And many times it goes to the court to see this balance.
KE:      So Har Gilo is not part of the bloc?
DT:      It is part of the area of Jerusalem. It is not inside Etzion, even though it is part of the Etzion regional council. Like Qedar, which is in Etzion regional council too, but is not in this area.
UD:     As we said, we are not discussing Jerusalem, up to Battir. We need the leaders to agree.
NF:      In the previous meetings you mentioned that these are the main areas that you are interested in but that there also others that were less important. Can you give us examples of those?
UD:     If there is an Israeli settlement, without any Palestinians or any Palestinian activity there, and they are just on the line, we’d like them to be part of Israel.
DT:      Like Har Adar and Oranit. They are close to the line.
UD:     Just on the line. It is areas where a slight change in the border will save us having to move Israelis.
SA:      What is the depth that you are considering this?
UD:     We are not considering depth. We speak here of realities on the ground. So it is not only Efrat; it is not because it is 8km into the West Bank but because there are all these settlements in this area with connection to Israel.
SA:      No matter how deep it is?
UD:     This is theoretical. We want to move as little as possible of the settlers. We will not ask for an isolated settlement that is deep inside the West Bank. We understand you have problems with Ariel and Ma’aleh Adumim, but we have no parameter to go deep inside [the West Bank].
SA:      You said there are 50,000 Israelis living in this area and that it is 54km2, so that means you are giving each person 1000m2.  What is the density inside Israel?
UD:     I don’t know. This doesn’t mean anything. You can play many games with numbers.
SA:      You mentioned some areas owned by Jews. What is the ratio of land in this area that is owned by Jews?
DT:      We are not talking about private land. There are many lands on both sides that are owned by both people. This is not the issue; we will tackle it later.
SA:      But it is for us. We cannot take somebody’s land and tell them we gave it to the Israelis. He will ask us how we can do that.
KE:      Even your own laws don’t allow you to build settlements on private land—at least in theory, since about 40% of settlements are built of private Palestinian land. So shall we take all those settlements off the table from now, since they are even against your own laws?
DT:      Oh no, not 40%.
KE:      What ever the number, a significant proportion of settlements are built on privately owned land.
DT:      We have to find
UD:     In making the line we try to minimize private land being taken and also minimize the number of people that will need to cross the line to the other side for their livelihood.
SA:      But that will not work if it is at the expense of other people. We have to consider this.
UD:     We each have our realities. It’s not the same. Everyone looks at history in a different way. We are creating a new state. It is something new, that didn’t exist before. Israel already exists.
SA:      And keeps expanding.
UD:     You say “expanding”. I say something else.
KE:      You mentioned your interest in including 70-80% of the settlers. What total number of settlers are you basing this percentage on? Are you saying 80% of the total 480,000 settlers, or only some settlements?
DT:      [to UD] He’s including Jerusalem.
UD:     No, not counting Jerusalem.
NF:      What is the number?
UD:     We don’t have it now. Will have to check
FH:      Do you prioritize your settlements? For example, within a bloc do you consider that a certain settlement is more important? Here in the bloc you took out Tekoa.
UD:     First of all we do not have a policy of prioritizing. And second, if we had, we wouldn’t share it with you.
KE:      Is the area you designated on the map a single organic and indivisible unit, or are you flexible on it? In other words, is it ‘all or nothing’?
UD:     We don’t accept an ‘all or nothing’ approach and we the same from you. So of course we are going to negotiate with you and try to find solutions. We hope you are in the same position. Otherwise there is no point in talking. We like you we can have a nice chat.
SA:      OK, can you talk in specific terms on other areas, like you did for this one?
UD:     No, we’re not ready for that.
SA:      If this is the only area you want, OK, we can consider it.
DT:      [laughing] “We can consider it.”
UD      Would you like us to present this picture for all the other areas?
SA:      Yes.
UD:     Let me check [consults with UD and LA]… They support the idea. But that doesn’t mean it will happen. [laughing] We need to get permission to do that from the upper echelon.
SA:      We will try to talk to our leaders as well. But try to include Jerusalem. We are talking about borders, not just arrangements. We need the full picture including Jerusalem so that we understand what you are taking from us and then we tell you what we want in return. This will shorten the time, instead of just bits and pieces here and there.
UD:     As you know, we are trying to present to you [MISSING]
SA:      You are demanding these areas from us.
UD:     I am not demanding anything from you. We are not taking anything from you.  I just describe our position, our concept, give you information you need to understand our position. It is important for us to describe for us which areas you thinking about it.
SA:      we need next time to see the full picture, to go through all the areas so that we can come back with our proposal.
UD:     I understand… Next time we would like to hear from you. Abu Alaa has said that there are some settlements that you can accept. We would like to hear from you about those areas.
SA:      After you go through all of the areas.
UD:     I agree.
SA:      Or are you not in a hurry?
UD:     We have two major issues that need to wait for decision: Jerusalem and security. Security we initiated today the first meeting with Gen. Hazem Atallah, chief of police, and Amos Gil’ad. There are connections with our issues.
SA:      So maybe we can meet together sometimes?
UD:     We can consider that.
SA:      And we’ll go back to our side and check as well.
NF:      On process, when is the next meeting? Monday?
DT:      I can’t do Monday.
UD:     Let’s say Sunday. We will talk and confirm.
END TIME:  15h50

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *