Hi, and thanks for bringing your inquiry to Google Answers.
The government's official position basically is that Jews have always
had the right to settle in that area, and that the time period from
1948 to 1967 when such settlements were prohibited was an anamoly.
While maintaining its right to settlments, the government also says it
is willing to negotiate for a political agreement to bring peace.
Here are some key points made by the government:
-- "As long as the future status of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria)
and Gaza is subject to negotiation, Israel's historic and legal claim
to these territories is no less valid than that of the Palestinians."
-- "Jewish settlement in West Bank and Gaza Strip territory has
existed from time immemorial and was expressly recognized as
legitimate in the Mandate for Palestine adopted in 1922 by the League
of Nations."
-- "Many present-day Israeli settlements have been established on
sites that were home to Jewish communities in previous generations, in
an expression of the Jewish people's deep historic and religious
connection with the land."
-- "It should be emphasized that the movement of individual Israelis
to the territories is entirely voluntary, while the settlements
themselves are not intended to displace Arab inhabitants, nor do they
do so in practice."
-- "Politically, the West Bank and Gaza Strip are best regarded as
territory over which there are competing claims that should be
resolved in peace negotiations. Israel has valid claims to title in
this territory based not only on its historic and religious connection
to the land, and its recognized security needs, but also on the fact
that the territory was not under the sovereignty of any state and came
under Israeli control in a war of self-defense, imposed upon Israel.
At the same time, Israel recognizes that the Palestinians also
entertain legitimate claims to the area."
"It is important to note that, in the spirit of compromise and in an
attempt to take constructive confidence building measures in the peace
process, successive Israeli governments have expressly recognized the
need for territorial compromise in West Bank and Gaza Strip territory
and have adopted a voluntary freeze on the building of new
settlements. In this regard, the present national unity government,
under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, has officially declared that it
will not build any new settlements, while remaining committed to the
basic needs of the existing settlement communities (Government of
Israel, Policy Guidelines, March 2001)."
The above excerpts answer your question about the official Israeli
explanation. The full statement can be found on the Web site of the
Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0i9o0#settle
You can also see the official position on numerous related issues in
the FAQ on the site:
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0i9o0
One of the related questions answered (from the official Israeli view)
is on the link of terrorism and the occupation:
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0ldc0
You can find the IsraeliMinistry of Foreign Affairs' home page here:
http://www.israel.org
Negotiations that took place during the Clinton administration called
for Israel to give up 94 to 96 percent of the territory, not that
percentage of the settlements, news stories on the negotiations
specifically indicate. Here are links to some articles from various
perspectives that indicate the terms:
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/clintonframework.htm
http://www2.haaretz.co.il/special/elections2001-e/f/346443.asp
http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/PRRN/papers/moratinos.html
http://www.fmep.org/analysis/mitchell_report_framework_for_peace.html
http://www.poica.org/casestudies/colonization/
The following article makes this clear, noting that from the
Palestinian perspective, the "94 to 96 percent" of the terrority was
for all practical purposes far less than that, since it included large
areas of water and other other unoccupied zones.
http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/pubs/20010123ib.html
The Middle East is obviously a fascinating area for research and
study. I hope this summary and these links have answered your
question.
Sincerely,
mvguy |
Clarification of Answer by
mvguy-ga
on
10 May 2002 07:25 PDT
I'm sorry, but I made the mistake of uploading the answer before I had
proofread it. Please accept my apologies. A corrected version
follows.
==========
Hi, and thanks for bringing your inquiry to Google Answers.
The government's official position basically is that Jews have always
had the right to settle in that area, and that the time period from
1948 to 1967 when such settlements were prohibited was an anomaly.
While maintaining its right to settlements, the government also says
it is willing to negotiate for a political agreement to bring peace.
Here are some key points made by the government:
-- As long as the future status of the West Bank (Judea and Samaria)
and Gaza is subject to negotiation, Israel's historic and legal claim
to these territories is no less valid than that of the Palestinians."
-- "Jewish settlement in West Bank and Gaza Strip territory has
existed from time immemorial and was expressly recognized as
legitimate in the Mandate for Palestine adopted in 1922 by the League
of Nations."
-- "Many present-day Israeli settlements have been established on
sites that were home to Jewish communities in previous generations, in
an expression of the Jewish people's deep historic and religious
connection with the land."
-- "It should be emphasized that the movement of individual Israelis
to the territories is entirely voluntary, while the settlements
themselves are not intended to displace Arab inhabitants, nor do they
do so in practice."
-- "Politically, the West Bank and Gaza Strip are best regarded as
territory over which there are competing claims that should be
resolved in peace negotiations. Israel has valid claims to title in
this territory based not only on its historic and religious connection
to the land, and its recognized security needs, but also on the fact
that the territory was not under the sovereignty of any state and came
under Israeli control in a war of self-defense, imposed upon Israel.
At the same time, Israel recognizes that the Palestinians also
entertain legitimate claims to the area."
"It is important to note that, in the spirit of compromise and in an
attempt to take constructive confidence building measures in the peace
process, successive Israeli governments have expressly recognized the
need for territorial compromise in West Bank and Gaza Strip territory
and have adopted a voluntary freeze on the building of new
settlements. In this regard, the present national unity government,
under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, has officially declared that it
will not build any new settlements, while remaining committed to the
basic needs of the existing settlement communities (Government of
Israel, Policy Guidelines, March 2001)."
The above excerpts answer your question about the official Israeli
explanation. The full statement can be found on the Web site of the
Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0i9o0#settle
You can also see the official position on numerous related issues in
the FAQ on the site:
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0i9o0
One of the related questions answered (from the official Israeli view)
is on the link of terrorism and the occupation:
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0ldc0
You can find the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs' home page here:
http://www.israel.org
Negotiations that took place during the Clinton administration called
for Israel to give up 94 to 96 percent of the territory, not that
percentage of the settlements, news stories on the negotiations
specifically indicate. Here are links to some articles from various
perspectives that indicate the terms:
http://www.ariga.com/treaties/clintonframework.htm
http://www2.haaretz.co.il/special/elections2001-e/f/346443.asp
http://www.arts.mcgill.ca/MEPP/PRRN/papers/moratinos.html
http://www.fmep.org/analysis/mitchell_report_framework_for_peace.html
http://www.poica.org/casestudies/colonization/
The following article makes this clear, noting that from the
Palestinian perspective, the "94 to 96 percent" of the territory was
for all practical purposes far less than that, since it included large
areas of water and other unoccupied zones.
http://www.palestinecenter.org/cpap/pubs/20010123ib.html
The Middle East is obviously a fascinating area for research and
study. I hope this summary and these links have answered your
question.
Sincerely,
mvguy
|
