Why Many Oppose Israeli Settlements - Beyond Charities and Ideologies
The question of why so many people oppose Israeli settlement in the West Bank arises from a complex interplay of international law, political ideologies, and socio-economic factors. This article delves into the roots of opposition and explores the differing types of settlers involved. We will also examine the legal and moral justifications for the opposition and challenge the commonly held assumptions about the motivations behind this stance.
Understanding the Opposition
The opposition to Israeli settlements is not solely driven by charitable endeavors or ideological affiliations. It is a reflection of the broader struggle for a one-state or two-state solution in the Middle East, emphasizing the rights and aspirations of the Palestinian people for an independent and self-governing state.
The Human Dimension of Settlements
It is imperative to recognize that beyond the political and legal discourse, the settlements are inhabited by real people who support the establishment and maintenance of these communities. However, it is crucial to acknowledge that the majority of settlers, both due to their origins and the circumstances surrounding their settlements, often find themselves paying for and guarding these areas without full support from the government or the settler community as a whole.
Types of Settlers
There are three primary types of settlers, each with its unique characteristics and motivations:
1. The Idealists
Following the Six-Day War, a few individuals moved into the new territories to live among the Arabs without seeking government approval. These settlers believed thousands would follow, but this did not materialize. By the time of the First Intifada, these settlers had largely left the area. This group represented a small percentage, and their actions were driven by idealism rather than widespread support.
2. The Government-Initiated Settlements
These settlements were established by the government and occupied non-disputed areas such as the Sinai Peninsula, Jordan Valley, and areas adjacent to the Green Line. These settlements were part of government policy and received support in terms of financing, maintenance, and defense. When government policy shifted, these settlements were evacuated, indicating their dependence on governmental backing. These settlements were also relatively short-lived compared to the third type.
3. Disputed Sectorial Settlements
The most persistent and controversial type of settlements are those initiated by settlers often against government policies and sometimes illegally. Once established, these settlers use their political power to secure government resources and protection for maintaining and defending these areas. These settlers have managed to create a significant presence in the West Bank, despite being illegal under international law.
Legal and Moral Justifications
The opposition to these settlements is rooted in several legal and moral justifications. Firstly, international law considers these settlements illegal, primarily because they are based on the occupation of land considered to be the property of the Palestinian people. Additionally, these settlements are established on ethnically cleansed land, which raises ethical concerns. Lastly, these settlements are often characterized by a disproportionately high Jewish-only infrastructure, which is seen as discriminatory.
Case Study: Invasions and Counterattacks
A thought experiment helps illustrate the perspective of settlers: imagine buying property, building a house, and neighbors killing your children for being Jewish. In response, you fight back, gain and lose territories, achieving a balance in favor of your community, but with family members lost along the way. The neighbors then suggest that the way to end the conflict is by evicting all fellow Jews from the areas expected to be ceded, while granting the opposition the right to enter your property at will and denying you the right to own your own land. This scenario vividly demonstrates the injustices faced by Jewish settlers and the reasons why they strongly oppose such a resolution.
Conclusion
The opposition to Israeli settlements is a multifaceted issue that harbors deep-rooted legal, ethical, and practical concerns. Understanding the motivations and perspectives of all parties involved is crucial for a balanced and informed discussion. As the situation in the Middle East continues to evolve, it is essential to approach this topic with a nuanced understanding of the complexities at play.
Keywords: Israeli settlements, Palestinian independence, West Bank