New york dating israel to seize land for barrier
It was, after all, the billion in loan guarantees by the United States that made this barrier possible. She implores it for answers, as if it is a Sphinx that will answer the riddle of her new existence. The wall, built by Israel a year before, blocked her from the neighboring Israeli town of Kfar Saba where she used to shop. It made it hard to reach the rest of the West Bank.
Ending the loan guarantees, as long as they were used to build settlements and seize even more Palestinian land, would have done more to blunt the rage and violence of militants than all the iron fragmentation bombs Israel has dropped on the hapless civilians in Lebanon, the West Bank and Gaza. We react to the manifestation of rage rather than the cause of rage. The lone Israeli checkpoint with its guard towers, floodlights, concrete barriers, dust, stench, crowds, special pass cards, intrusive searches, rude remarks by border police were more than she could bare.
We asked them to be quiet, to be reasonable, to calm down, and when they did not, their blood heated by years of abuse and neglect, we condemned them to their fate. There are days when the checkpoint is sealed, days after suicide bombings or days when the Israeli soldiers shut it down abruptly without explanation. Families pass each other two, three, four times in an afternoon. “The town would rent buses to go to the sea,” she says. He has trouble shipping car parts into the walled enclosure. Customers, those in Israel and those in other areas of the West Bank, can no longer get to his store. Sometimes the soldiers get tired or bored or surly and turn people away until the next morning. The other morning she was hanging laundry to dry and she heard singing. I think only of you.” Her five boys were in the yard. There was a chorus of voices, the sweet voice and the voices of the children. She looked up and saw a soldier watching her from the top of the mound. His raspy voice crackled over the megaphone mounted on the jeep.
The barrier built by Israel in the West Bank is one of the most tangible and important symbols of this long humiliation, this strangulation of the Palestinians by Israel. On those days she sometimes gathers up her children and walks the empty streets, wandering like prisoners in a circle. He does not have a permit to drive the family car through the checkpoint. “We talk about how we are going to survive, what we are going to do,” she said. The song was by Fadel Shaker, a popular Arab singer. “You who are far away, why do you forget those who love you? She peered up into the glaring sunlight to see the singer. Then he disappeared behind the wall.” She was on the balcony a few days later. He ordered her to go inside and close the shutters.
In an expert opinion filed to the court, Yiftachel said that these “tribal areas” of scattered tent clusters were not at that time registered with the authorities, but were nevertheless considered “settled” and met the definition of a “village” in the 1921 Land Ordinance.
The Bedouin also presented aerial photographs from 1945 onwards, which they said showed there had been extensive cultivation covering al-Arakib, meaning that it could not have been classified as Mawat land. Ruth Kark, gave the complete opposite view, and said that prior to 1858, there had been no fixed settlements on or near to the disputed land.
They said that the land had been cultivated and owned by them, and so classified as Miri land under Ottoman legal terms.
Mawat lands were both uncultivated and not adjacent to settled lands.
During the al-Uqbi lawsuit, both the state and the Bedouin brought extensive expert testimonies, pitting the country’s most prominent experts in historical and political geography against each other. Oren Yiftachel, one of the country’s foremost geographers and social scientists, gave expert testimony. Ruth Kark, a leading expert on the historical geography of Palestine and Israel from the Hebrew University.At the heart of the case was the debate of whether the Bedouin were able to prove that they had private land rights to the disputed plots, despite a lack of formal land-title deeds showing the land had been registered in their name in the Ottoman land registry, the “Tabu.” Central to this was the question of the land’s legal classification under Ottoman and British rule, and whether it had been a form of state land, known as Mawat (wasteland that could not be cultivated).When the Israel Land Law abolished the old Ottoman land classifications in 1969, it said all land would revert to state lands, unless a claimant could produce proof of private ownership in the form of Ottoman or British legal title.Dovrat added that “although the complainants believe they have proof that they held the land for generations, and that four families from the el-Ukbi tribe cultivated and owned the land, such claims require a legitimate legal basis in accordance with the the relevant legislation and according to precedents set out in case law.” The judge held that the plaintiffs’ documents indicated that they knew they had a duty to register land in the “Tabu” (the land registry) but had not wanted to do so.“The state said that although the complainants are not entitled to compensation, it has been willing to negotiate with them,” the judge added.
However, the court did not accept this claim, saying that if the Ottoman authorities had wished to exempt a particular population from the law, then they would have done so explicitly.