Monitoring group blames Israel for Palestinian exodus from Hebron

[Herschel]

Israeli policies have led to an exodus of Palestinians out of parts of the West Bank city of Hebron, an official of an international monitoring group based in the city said Monday.

Roar Sorensen of the Temporary International Presence in Hebron, said difficult conditions in the area of the city under Israeli control had caused many Palestinians to leave, but he did not have exact figures.

"B'tselem, an Israeli group that specializes in Palestinian human rights issues, estimates as many as 15,000 of its 35,000 Palestinian residents have left the Israeli-controlled zone. Altogether, about 130,000 Palestinians live in Hebron.

In a lengthy response, the Israeli military insisted soldiers take pains not to harm civilians but did not address the claim that many Palestinians have left parts of Hebron under Israeli control.

The Palestinian governor of the Hebron area, Arif Jaabari, said many Palestinians have fled because of Israeli curfews and other harsh security measures. "People always feel afraid," he said. "Anyone who has an opportunity to leave the area will leave."

cut

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/02/16/international1030EST0508.DTL

Israeli security measures are necesary and should remain in place as long as seen fit. Palestinians exercizing their right to relocate is legitimate.

[ex_jew]

1. "Palestinians exercizing their right to relocate is legitimate."

Glad to hear it. Nice to know you don't blame the ethnic cleansees.

[Herschel]

2. These are security measures

Palestinians are leaving voluntarily for a more favorable area.

[Jack Rabbit]

3. More favorable area?

Why is the area in which they were living unfavorable? Their families had been living there for some time. Why is it now unfavorable?

If the authorities create unfavorable conditions in order to drive out a group of people, it is no less ethnic cleansing when those people move "voluntarily" than it would be if they were marched out of the area at gunpoint.

Hebron is not in Israel. What right do the Israelis have to drive Palestinians from their homes in order to make way for Israeli settlements?

These are not security measures. This will do nothing to protect Israelis in Israel. This is designed to assert the right of Israelis to settle land beyond Israel's border among hostile people. If the Israeli government were really interested in the security of Israeli citizens, the settlements would be evacuated and the residents brought inside a defensive perimeter.

The settlements are illegal under Article 49, paragraph 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This incident demonstrates why it is illegal for an occupying power to transfer parts of its own population to occupied territory.

[Herschel]

4. I do not believe

the conditions are intended to drive Palestinians away. They are an attempt to fight terror. The unpleasantness for the civilian population is a side effect.

[Jack Rabbit]

5. I disagree

Again, if Israel were interested in protecting her citizens from attacks by Palestinians, she would not encourage or even allow them to move to Palestinian territory. Segeregated settlements accessed by segregated roads in and around Hebron do little to protect Israelis from a suicide bombing in Tel Aviv or Haifa. Consequently, settling occupied terrirtory has nothing to do with fighting terror. Insofar as it creates targets for attack, it not only doesn't solve any problem, it exacerbates it.

Mr. Begin, a man in serious need of a geography lesson, declared the West Bank and Gaza an "intergral part of Israel" in 1977 and stepped up settlement activity. The meaning was clear: these lands, which had never been part of the modern state of Israel, were annexed by ministerial decree; Jews have rights in them and Arabs do not. Israelis live beyond Israel's borders with the rights of Israel citizens, protected by the IDF. In order to do this, Palestinians are displaced. That is not a mere unpleasant side effect of fighting terror.

It is deliberate policy of favoring the rights of Israeli settlers in occupied territory over the rights of the native inhabitants of the land. That is what Article 49/paragraph 6 of the Fourth Geneva Convention was intended to prevent; that is why the settlements are illegal under international law.

The settlements are not about fighting terror and the measures around Hebron are about protecting settlements, not about fighting terror. The settlements are about territorial expansion, and therefore the measures to protect the settlements are about territorial expansion into land acquired by war. If the government really wanted to do something responsible to protect the settlers, it would abandon the settlements and bring Israeli citizens back inside Israel's borders where they can more easily be protected from attacks.