Latest Developments

 

14/01/2013 Back To List
E-1/Bab ash-Shams: What Happened, What it Means, What Next


Last week, a group of Palestinians launched a well-planned, well thought-out, non-violent protest in the area known to the world as E-1, with the establishment of a tent encampment at a site dubbed Bab Ash-Shams.  As was widely reported in the Israeli and international media, the Israeli government responded rapidly and vigorously, evicting the protesters and declaring the area a closed military zone. 


The Basic Facts
 

The status of the site:  The protest took place on land the Palestinians claim was privately owned.  This claim cannot be confirmed without a surveyor, but on its face it is reasonable, and according to an investigation by Haaretz, the land is indeed private.. Construction of the E-1 settlement is planned on the 12.5 sq. kilometers of the area that was declared, in a highly problematic procedure, as State Lands – based on the argument that these are lands where no specific owner could make a rigorous claim to title (a very common occurrence, since these lands were owned/occupied by recently sedentary Bedouin tribes who were resettled in the area, by Israel, following the 1967 war). However, there are pockets of land within the E-1 area and on its perimeter whose owners succeeded in meeting the Israeli-imposed standards of ownership.  These are, indeed, Israeli-recognized privately-owned lands.  It appears that the Palestinian demonstration took place, at least in part, on such a site. That said, the question of the status of the land is only of cardinal importance if one adopts the assumptions that “State Land” is Israeli Land, to which Palestinians have no claim (for an excellent discussion of this issue, see this article by Aeyal Gross in Haaretz).

The court injunction:  The Palestinians received an Israeli court injunction, in advance, preventing the evacuation of their protest.   Specifically, the Court granted a temporary injunction forbidding “the evacuation and/or the demolition of the tents erected on the lands of A Tur, east of A Zayyem, unless there will be an acute security need. The respondents will respond to the motion for an interim injunction within 6 days.”  The inclusion of the “an acute security,” terminology provided the Netanyahu government a thin pretext for taking action against the protest – one they took full advantage of.

The security question:  The tents were set up in an isolated desert area, so even if the status of the land was in question, no credible argument could be made that the tents and protesters represented a threat to security or public order.  No roads were obstructed or interfered with by the protest, it was not adjacent to any built-up area, Israeli or Palestinian, it posed no nuisance, and the gathering at the site posed no risk to settlers or Israel.

The Israeli government response:  It appears that Netanyahu government made two claims as a basis for taking action against this Palestinian protest.  First, it claimed that while the injunction prevents the dismantling of the tents, it didn't apply to the evacuation of the protesters.  Second, the Netanyahu government asserted that there was an acute security threat, and a threat to public safety.  It has been hinted that one way the State Attorney justified the latter assertion was by citing the threat made by Israeli right-wing extremists to challenge the Palestinians.  It has also been reported that the State gave the court a sealed secret “opinion” to back up its security argument.

Did the IDF violate the Court’s order?  While it can be argued that the IDF did not violate the letter of the Court injunction, it certainly violated the spirit of the injunction – and used extremely problematic reasoning to justify its actions. The notion that a few hundred non-violent protesters with 20 tents in an isolated desert area pose a security threat doesn’t pass the laugh test.  If, indeed, the State Attorney cited the Israeli right-wing extremists threat as an argument for taking this position, this is yet another example of Israeli authorities allowing those threatening illegal actions (the Israeli extremists) are granted veto power over those acting within the law (the Palestinians).  This is something that has been seen in the past in the context of blocking access by pro-peace organizations to Hebron, among other things.


The Message of the E-1/Bab ash-Shams Eviction
 

The Netanyahu government’s eviction of protesters from the Bab Ash-Shams protest site was technically legal under Israel law (with the term “legal” defined by Israel law, rather than any other objective standard). It was also, by all substantive and objective measures, outrageous, putting some ugly truths on stark display for the entire world to see:

(a)    “Security” is a political issue:  The current Israeli government’s definition of a “security threat” is not confined solely or even most prominently to threats to Israeli lives or Israeli borders; it extends to any Palestinian action, however benign and non-violent, that threatens the current government’s ideological vision for the West Bank and East Jerusalem.  This was evident in the Netanyahu government’s response to the Palestinian non-violent, pro-two-state solution approach to the UN, and it is equally evident in this government’s self-righteous response to the Palestinian protest in E-1.

(b)    Basic rights don’t exist under occupation:  Palestinians living under occupation do not enjoy the rights of free speech and or non-violent protest/demonstration.  This is in contrast to the rights enjoyed by Israeli protesters in Tel Aviv, or Israeli extremists setting up illegal outposts on hilltops across the West Bank.  For those constantly asking “where is the Palestinian Gandhi?” the Israeli response at E-1, along with its harsh response to unarmed Palestinian protests in Bil’in, Nilin, Nabi Saleh, etc, provide a clear answer.

(c)    Not all “outposts” are equal, not all Court orders equally compelling:  The Israeli government’s rapid action to evict Palestinian protesters from Bab ash-Shams stands in stark contrast to its unwillingness to remove illegal outposts erected by Israeli settlers.  Even when there are clear orders from Israel courts to evacuate these Israeli outposts, successive Israeli governments have engaged in outrageous foot-dragging tactics – tactics that appear to be geared to allowing settlers to dig in at the sites.  The Netanyahu government has, in this regard, gone even further than previous governments, in adopting an official policy aimed at “legalizing,” through any means possible, the illegal outposts.  Removals of illegal settler outposts has occurred only after Israeli courts have cornered the Israeli government and deprived them of all other options, and have been offset by compensatory “gifts” to the settlers in the form of new settlement approvals.

(d)    Palestinian non-violent protest, and any other Palestinian initiative, will be crushed:   Netanyahu's message to the Palestinians, encapsulated by the response at E-1/Bab Ash-Shams, has been clear and consistent:  you have no option but to give in and give up.  He has made clear that negotiations offer no political horizon for Palestinians to achieve the goal of their own state, and will be used only to further discredit and humiliate their leaders. Efforts to achieve gains through non-violent diplomatic moves, like going to the UN, will be framed as diplomatic terrorism. Non-violent protest, even protest legal under Israeli law, will be crushed – and framed in terms that make clear to the world that this is just a new form of unarmed terrorism.   And violent protest – which Israel appears to be deliberately pushing Palestinians toward – is terrorism that, too, will be crushed, and will be exploited to make the case that the issue is not Israeli actions and policies, but that the Palestinians do not want peace and hunger to kill Jews.  

(e)    Israel contiguity counts; Palestinian contiguity doesn’t:  Following the announcement late last year that the Netanyahu government was expediting approval E-1, settlement supporters and apologists launched a spin offensive, insisting that the construction of E-1 is compatible is contiguous Palestinian state. That spin offensive, targeting both the media and government officials, was intended to counteract analysis – including from Terrestrial Jerusalem – that construction of E-1 will effectively dismember the West Bank and prevent the emergence of a viable, contiguous Palestinian state with its capital in East Jerusalem.  That spin offensive was dealt an unintentional blow in the context of the E-1/Bab Ash-Shams protest, when Prime Minister Netanyahu explained the government’s harsh reaction to the Palestinian protest by stating: “We will not allow anyone to harm the contiguity between Jerusalem and Maale Adumim.”  With this statement, the world now witnesses the spectacle of Netanyahu and those behind the E-1 spin offensive insisting that 3500 permanent settler units and 12,000 new settlers do not however harm the contiguity of a future Palestinian State, while at the same time arguing, in an indignant tone, that 20 tents and 200 Palestinians unacceptably “harm” contiguity between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim. 


What Next from Netanyahu?
 

The events in E-1/Bab ash-Shams were clearly welcomed by Netanyahu as an election prop.  He succeeded in portraying a small group of non-violent Palestinians protesters into a surrogate for Iran, and in doing so doubling down on his claim to be the protector of Israel’s security against great enemies out to destroy it.

We are now in the final week counting down to Israeli elections.  In the past, Netanyahu has initiated a Jerusalem event in the days before an election in order to motivate his base. In 1996, there was a massive “Peres will divide Jerusalem” campaign, which is often cited as having been the decisive factor in Netanyahu’s victory in those close elections. In 1999, behind in the polls, Netanyahu tried to close the Orient House (he was prevented from doing so by a Supreme Court injunction obtained by Danny Seidemann).  

It is possible that these latest events in E-1 will satisfy Netanyahu's appetite for a pre-election Jerusalem event; however, given his history, and given the fact that he is concerned about losing votes to Naftali Bennett on his right, nobody should assume this will be the case. The question is, should he decide to initiate a new Jerusalem provocation before the elections, what are the likely candidates? The most obvious high-profile settlement schemes have already been put in play (see previous reporting from TJ), making it more difficult to guess.  However, we think the following to be most likely:
 

  • The formal statutory publication in the Israeli press of the two E-1 town plans (E-1 Plan 420/4/7, for 1250 units, and E-1 Plan 420/4/10, for 2146 units), allowing Netanyahu to deflect right-wing rumblings that he is holding up implementation of the plan and to show he is, as he has claimed, serious about building E-1.
  • The announcement of the approval of Givat Hamatos D, for 1100 hotel units.  It is still not clear if the plan was approved by the Regional Committee, but there is reason to believe that it may have done so. (It should be recalled that in January 2013, Netanyahu instructed the Regional Committee to keep quiet about its approval of Mordot Gilo South, for reasons of political expedience.  It is possible the same thing has happened in this case).
  • The publication of tenders for either Ramat Shlomo or Mordot Gilo West.
     

What next from the Palestinians?


The wide media coverage generated by the E-1/Bab Ash-Shams protest effort seems likely to generate additional, similar efforts.  With the political process at a standstill and with the Netanyahu government opening the floodgates on settlement expansion in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, such activism could draw welcome attention to the plight of Palestinians and the Kafka-esque rules that govern their lives.  At the same time, the Israeli government’s rapid and decisive response to the E-1/Bab Ash-Shams reinforces its message of zero tolerance for Palestinian non-violent protest in the West Bank, and doubly so when that protest runs up against right-wing expansionist plans.  If the experience of Bil’in, Nilin, Nebi Saleh, and elsewhere tell us anything, it is that Israel has no good response to Palestinian non-violent protest, and, as a result, is left with only bad responses – responses that over time will likely become more violent.


 

1/10/2014 Breaking & Urgent News: Givat Hamatos Approved

 


30/9/2014 Major Development: In Overnight Operation, Settlers Take Over Multiple Buildings in Silwan

 


18/9/2014 Specter of E-1 Raised by Plan to Relocate Bedouin

 


18/9/2014 Looming Crisis in East Jerusalem - Givat Hamatos

 


17/9/2014 East Jerusalem Clashes Continue

 


9/9/2014 East Jerusalem Aflame

 


4/9/2014 The Real Story about those new units "approved" for Palestinians in East Jerusalem

 


26/8/2014 Gilo Tenders Awarded, but (for now) EJ Settlement Freeze Continues

 


19/5/2014 Jerusalem Settlements - The (Proximate, Contributing) Cause of the Collapse

 


19/5/2014 Post-Collapse - De Facto Freeze in East Jerusalem, But the Lull Won’t Last

 


19/5/2014 Are We Sliding Toward Religious War? A Brief Survey of Key Jerusalem Developments/Trends

 


5/3/2014 Framework Language and Jerusalem: Gimmicks Are NOT the Answer

 


5/3/2014 New Israeli Yeshiva Approved...in Downtown Sheikh Jarrah

 


5/3/2014 Playing with Fire, Part 2: Elad Set to Gain Control of Area Adjacent to the Temple Mt/Haram al Sharif

 


5/3/2014 Playing with Fire, Part 1: Debating the Status Quo on the Temple Mount

 


3/3/2014 Demolition orders in E-1

 


9/1/2014 New Seidemann Op-Ed in the Guardian: The myth of an undivided Jerusalem is collapsing under its own weight

 


12/12/2013 Danny Seidemann Injured by Stone-Thrower - Condition Update & Comment

 


12/12/2013 East Jerusalem Settlements since the Resumption of Talks: the Facts & their Implications

 


12/12/2013 The [Apparent] Re-Emergence of the “Greater Jerusalem” Gimmick

 


12/12/2013 Post-Script: Those Planning Tenders for 24,000 New Settlement Units

 


27/8/2013 Ramat Shlomo Back in the Headlines

 


27/8/2013 Funding Approved for Settler-Run Projects in Silwan and Jebel Mukabber

 


27/8/2013 Three Palestinians Killed by Israeli Forces in Qalandia RC

 


27/8/2013 ?Uptick in East Jerusalem Home Demolitions

 


19/8/2013 Pyromaniacs Target the Temple Mount

 


19/8/2013 Jerusalem Residency Concerns Resurface

 


19/8/2013 New Pro-Settlement Guidelines on Absentee Property Law

 


19/8/2013 A U.S. Court Rules on Jerusalem

 


16/8/2013 Timeline/details of Recent Jerusalem-Related Settlement Developments

 


16/8/2013 Bibi, Settlements & Peace Talks -- Analysis

 


13/6/2013 The A-Zayyem/Mount of Olives Interchange, Plan 14049

 


13/6/2013 Tenders Awarded for Ramot Expansion, Additional Tenders for Mordot Gilo

 


13/6/2013 Everything You Need to Know About Jerusalem & the Absentee Property Law

 


7/5/2013 The IDF Colleges on the Mt. of Olives Off the Agenda, Again

 


7/5/2013 Plans Published for Old City Cable Car

 


7/5/2013 Sharansky Plan Hits a Wall, no pun intended

 


7/5/2013 The Wall/Barrier vs. Cremisan & Beit Jala

 


5/5/2013 Spatial Shaping in J'lem Continues with Opening of Route 20

 


24/4/2013 Concerns about Proposed “Solution” to Women’s Prayer Issue at the Western Wall

 


22/4/2013 The Politics of Waste Treatment in East Jerusalem

 


15/4/2013 Fifty New Units in East Talpiot

 


14/1/2013 E-1/Bab ash-Shams: What Happened, What it Means, What Next

 


28/12/2012 Mordot Gilo South - APPROVED

 


19/12/2012 Givat Hamatos APPROVED - What it Means

 


17/12/2012 Breaking News - Approvals this week - Ramat Shlomo & Givat Hamatos

 


5/12/2012 The E-1 Crisis...This Is Not a Drill

 


6/11/2012 More than 1200 New Tenders Issued for Pisgat Ze'ev and Ramot

 


31/10/2012 New Construction Approved in Har Homa

 


30/10/2012 New East Jerusalem Settlement Construction Approved - East Talpiot units for Israeli Security Personnel

 


24/10/2012 Mordot Gilo Construction Approved

 


24/10/2012 Plans for IDF Colleges on Mt. of Olives Deposited for Public Review & Explanation of Location

 


24/10/2012 Taking the Garbage to East Jerusalem

 


24/10/2012 Is the Palestinian Population of East Jerusalem Becoming More Israeli -- No

 


24/10/2012 Pisgat Zeev in the News

 


18/10/2012 Crisis Brewing on the Temple Mount

 


17/9/2012 Jerusalem, Netanyahu and the two-state solution

 


16/9/2012 Issue to watch: East Jerusalem Home Demolitions

 


16/9/2012 Attacks on Palestinians in Jerusalem – Sign of the “Hebronization” of the City

 


16/9/2012 Jerusalem in the Headlines: Ras al-Amud, Temple Mount, the Barrier, Elad, & Har Homa

 


15/9/2012 Jerusalem: Political Football in U.S. Presidential Race

 


14/9/2012 In Memorium: Our Friend, Chris Stevens

 


2/7/2012 New Tenders Published for East Jerusalem Settlement Construction

 


2/7/2012 Plans for New IDF War College on the Mt. of Olives Approved for Public Review

 


8/5/2012 Arab VIPs Start Coming to Jerusalem

 


7/5/2012 Givat Hamatos – Nearing the Point-of-No-Return

 


7/5/2012 IDF College on the Mt. of Olives – Moving Forward

 


7/5/2012 Kidmat Tzion – Municipal Approval Anticipated Soon

 


7/5/2012 Mughrabi Ramp – Some Good News

 


6/5/2012 Beit Hanina Settlement Effort Continues

 


10/4/2012 Late Winter Freeze in East Jerusalem turns to Spring Thaw

 


8/4/2012 Kidmat Tziyon Settlement Scheme to be Expedited

 


8/4/2012 New East Jerusalem “Park” Soon to get Final Approval

 


8/4/2012 New Settlement in Beit Hanina?

 


8/4/2012 Israeli High Court Rejects Shepherd’s Hotel Appeal

 


14/3/2012 Will Arab & Muslim Leaders Start Coming to Jerusalem?


 


14/3/2012 A Major East Jerusalem Settlement Plan Comes Back to Life

 


14/3/2012 Spotlight on Jewish Access to the Temple Mount

 


14/3/2012 Volatility in Silwan: Mini-Intifada Continues, Cave-Ins, and New Settler Plans

 


9/1/2012 The Ongoing Settlement Surge in East Jerusalem

 


9/1/2012 The Mughrabi Gate Saga - Update

 


10/12/2011 Barkat Tries to Force Mughrabi Ramp Demolition

 


9/12/2011 Approval of Mount Scopus "Park" Proceeds

 


13/10/2011 Approval for New Israeli Settlement at Givat Hamatos Proceeds

 


12/10/2011 New Pisgat Ze'ev Building Permits

 


28/9/2011 New Settlement Approval issued for Gilo - Plan 13261

 


11/8/2011 More Jerusalem Settlement Approvals: Ramat Shlomo, Pisgat Zeev, Givat Hamatos

 


10/8/2011 Yet Another Har Homa Plan Approved (No. 12825) - Public Buildings, 50 Units

 


5/8/2011 Har Homa C Plan 10310 (app. 983 units) Approved

 


9/7/2011 Jerusalem Municipal "Approval" of Mordot Gilo Plan

 


9/7/2011 Meretz Rejoins Municipal Coalition - Separate Portfolios for EJ Settlers and Palestinians

 


20/6/2011 The Ramat Shlomo House Extension Plans

 


10/6/2011 Committee for Acceleration of (EJ) Construction to Convene on June 14

 


24/5/2011 Netanyahu Approves East Jerusalem Construction Hours Before Obama Address

 


24/5/2011 Barkat Trying to Force Netanyahu's Hand on Mughrabi Ramp

 


12/5/2011 The Non-Existent Court Decision on Bustan Demolitions

 


10/5/2011 New East Jerusalem Settlements Update

 


9/5/2011 US Supreme Court to Hear Jerusalem Status Case

 


21/4/2011 Is There a De Facto Settlement Freeze in East Jerusalem? The Facts

 


18/4/2011 April Surge in East Jerusalem Construction Plans

 


18/4/2011 Mount Scopus Slopes Park Approved for Public Review

 


16/3/2011 Permit Issued for 14 Units at Ras el Amud Police Station

 


16/3/2011 Permit Issued for Mughrabi Ramp

 

29/7/2013 A Layman's Guide to Jerusalem House Demolitions
Daniel Seidemann

 


29/7/2013 A Laymen's Guide to the Planning Process in Jerusalem.pdf
Daniel Seidmann

 


20/3/2013 "Spatial Shaping", the Ross Agenda and a Partial Settlement Freeze
Daniel Seidmann

 


10/3/2013 Spatial Shaping - Unilaterally Determining Israel’s Base-Line Border
Daniel Seidmann

 


10/9/2012 NOREF Policy Brief August 2012 | By Daniel Seidemann
Daniel Seidemann

 


30/1/2012 East Jerusalem and the Imminent Demise of the Two-State Solution
Daniel Seidemann

 


7/11/2011 East Jerusalem Developments and Trends: 2006-2011
Daniel Seidemann

 


31/10/2011 The TJ Guide to the Planning and Construction Process in East Jerusalem - Oct. 2011
Daniel Seidemann

 


15/10/2011 Givat Hamatos/Mordot Gilo: New Settlement Schemes on Jerusalem's Southern Flank
Daniel Seidemann

 


12/8/2011 U.S. (non)-Recognition of Sovereignty in Jerusalem: A Consistent Policy, 1948 - 2011
Lara Friedman

 


1/8/2011 Hanging On By Our Fingernails
Daniel Seidemann

 


22/2/2011 Jerusalem Challenges the API
Daniel Seidemann

 


21/2/2011 East Jerusalem settlers and Israel's never-ending War of Independence
Daniel Seidemann

 


20/2/2011 The Two Jerusalems
D. Seidemann D.Rothem

 


19/2/2011 Jerusalem on the Brink
Daniel Seidemann

 


19/2/2011 A barely tolerated minority
Daniel Seidemann

 


17/2/2011 Redeeming Jerusalem by truth, not hollow slogans
Daniel Seidemann

 


16/2/2011 Jerusalem, settlements, and the "everybody knows" fallacy
Lara Friedman - Daniel Seidemann

 


15/2/2011 Blogposts
Lara Friedman
 
 
http://www.sayarch.com/