Israel approves settlement project that could divide West Bank
Settlement development in E1, an open tract of land east of Jerusalem, has been under consideration for more than two decades, but was frozen due to U.S. pressure during previous administrations.
On Wednesday, the project received final approval from the Planning and Building Committee after the last petitions against it were rejected on Aug. 6.
If the process moves quickly, infrastructure work could begin in the next few months and construction of homes could start in around a year. The plan includes around 3,500 apartments to expand the settlement of Maale Adumim, far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said during a press conference at the site last Thursday.
Smotrich cast the approval as a riposte to western countries that announced their plans to recognize a Palestinian state in recent weeks.
"This reality finally buries the idea of a Palestinian state, because there is nothing to recognize and no one to recognize," Smotrich told reporters. "Anyone in the world who tries today to recognize a Palestinian state will receive an answer from us on the ground."
The location of E1 is significant because it is one of the last geographical links between Ramallah, in the northern West Bank, and Bethlehem in the southern West Bank.
The two cities are 22 kilometers (14 miles) apart by air, but Palestinians traveling between them must take a wide detour and pass through multiple Israeli checkpoints, adding hours to the journey. The hope for final status negotiations for a Palestinian state was to have the region eventually serve as a direct link between the cities.
Peace Now, an organization that tracks settlement expansion in the West Bank, called the E1 project "deadly for the future of Israel and for any chance of achieving a peaceful two-state solution" which is "guaranteeing many more years of bloodshed."
Israel's plans to expand settlements are part of an increasingly difficult reality for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank as the world's attention focuses on the war in Gaza. There have been marked increases in attacks by settlers on Palestinians, evictions from Palestinian towns, and checkpoints that choke freedom of movement, as well as several Palestinian attacks on Israelis.
More than 700,000 Israelis now live in the occupied West Bank and east Jerusalem, territories captured by Israel in 1967 and sought by the Palestinians for a future state. The international community overwhelmingly considers Israeli settlement construction in these areas to be illegal and an obstacle to peace.
Israel's government is dominated by religious and ultranationalist politicians with close ties to the settlement movement. Smotrich, previously a firebrand settler leader and now finance minister, has been granted Cabinet-level authority over settlement policies and vowed to double the settler population in the West Bank.
Israel has annexed east Jerusalem and claims it as part of its capital, which is not internationally recognized. It says the West Bank is disputed territory whose fate should be determined through negotiations. Israel withdrew from 21 settlements Gaza in 2005.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Diplomat
2 hours ago
- The Diplomat
New Zealand Is Trailing Its Allies Over Palestinian Statehood
It's been 10 days since Prime Minister Christopher Luxon announced his government had begun to formally consider New Zealand's position on the recognition of a Palestinian state. That leaves less than three weeks until the United Nations General Assembly convenes on September 9, where it is expected several key allies will change position and recognize Palestinian statehood. Already part of the minority of U.N. member states that don't recognize a Palestinian state, New Zealand risks becoming more of an outlier if and when Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom make good on their recent pledges. Luxon has said the decision is 'complex,' but opposition parties certainly don't see it that way. Labor leader Chris Hipkins (and Luxon's predecessor as prime minister) says it's 'the right thing to do.' Greens co-leader Chloë Swarbrick has called on government MPs to 'grow a spine' (for which she was controversially ejected from the debating chamber). Former Labor prime minister Helen Clark has also criticized the government for trailing behind its allies, and for appearing to put trade relations with the United States ahead of taking a moral stand over Israel's actions in Gaza. Certainly, those critics – including the many around the country who marched over the weekend – are correct in implying New Zealand has missed several opportunities to show independent leadership on the issue. Since Palestine declared its independence in 1988, New Zealand has had the potential to recognize it as a state. There was a window of opportunity available in May last year when the Irish, Spanish, and Norwegian governments took the step. That month, New Zealand also joined 142 other states calling on the Security Council to admit Palestine as a full member of the United Nations. But in a subsequent statement, New Zealand said its vote should not be implied as recognizing Palestinian statehood, a position I called 'a kind of muddled, awkward fence-sitting.' It is still not too late, however, for New Zealand to take a lead. In particular, the government could make a more straightforward statement on Palestinian statehood than its close allies. The statements from Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom are filled with caveats, conditions and contingencies. None is a straightforward expression of solidarity with the Palestinian right of self-determination under international law. As such, they present political and legal problems New Zealand could avoid. Politically, this late wave of recognition by other countries risks becoming a distraction from the immediate starvation crisis in Gaza. As the Israeli journalist Gideon Levy and U.N. Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese have noted, these considered and careful diplomatic responses distract from the brutal truth on the ground. This was also Swarbrick's point during the snap debate in Parliament last week. Her private members bill, she noted, offers a more concrete alternative, by imposing sanctions and a trade embargo on Israel. (At present, it seems unlikely the government would support this.) Legally, the proposed recognitions of statehood are far from ideal because they place conditions on that recognition, including how a Palestinian state should be governed. The U.K. has made recognition conditional on Israel not agreeing to a ceasefire and continuing to block humanitarian aid into Gaza. That is extremely problematic, given recognition could presumably be withdrawn if Israel agreed to those demands. Such statements are not exercises in genuine solidarity with Palestinian self-determination, which is defined in U.N. Resolution 1514 (1960) as the right of peoples 'to freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.' Having taken more time to consider its position, New Zealand could now articulate a more genuine statement of recognition that fulfils the legal obligation to respect and promote self-determination under international law. A starting point would be to look beyond the small group of 'traditional allies' to countries such as Ireland that have already formally recognized the State of Palestine. Importantly, Ireland acknowledged Palestinian 'peaceful self-determination' (along with Israel's), but did not express any other conditions or caveats. New Zealand could also show leadership by joining with that wider group of allies to shape the coming General Assembly debate. The aim would be to shift the language from conditional recognition of Palestine toward a politically and legally more tenable position. That would also sit comfortably with the country's track record in other areas of international diplomacy – most notably the campaign to abolish nuclear weapons, where New Zealand has also taken a different approach to its traditional allies. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
The Mainichi
9 hours ago
- The Mainichi
Israel approves settlement project that could divide West Bank
TEL AVIV, Israel (AP) -- Israel gave final approval for a controversial settlement project in the occupied West Bank that would effectively cut the territory in two, and that Palestinians and rights groups say could destroy plans for a future Palestinian state. Settlement development in E1, an open tract of land east of Jerusalem, has been under consideration for more than two decades, but was frozen due to U.S. pressure during previous administrations. On Wednesday, the project received final approval from the Planning and Building Committee after the last petitions against it were rejected on Aug. 6. If the process moves quickly, infrastructure work could begin in the next few months and construction of homes could start in around a year. The plan includes around 3,500 apartments to expand the settlement of Maale Adumim, far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said during a press conference at the site last Thursday. Smotrich cast the approval as a riposte to western countries that announced their plans to recognize a Palestinian state in recent weeks. "This reality finally buries the idea of a Palestinian state, because there is nothing to recognize and no one to recognize," Smotrich told reporters. "Anyone in the world who tries today to recognize a Palestinian state will receive an answer from us on the ground." The location of E1 is significant because it is one of the last geographical links between Ramallah, in the northern West Bank, and Bethlehem in the southern West Bank. The two cities are 22 kilometers (14 miles) apart by air, but Palestinians traveling between them must take a wide detour and pass through multiple Israeli checkpoints, adding hours to the journey. The hope for final status negotiations for a Palestinian state was to have the region eventually serve as a direct link between the cities. Peace Now, an organization that tracks settlement expansion in the West Bank, called the E1 project "deadly for the future of Israel and for any chance of achieving a peaceful two-state solution" which is "guaranteeing many more years of bloodshed." Israel's plans to expand settlements are part of an increasingly difficult reality for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank as the world's attention focuses on the war in Gaza. There have been marked increases in attacks by settlers on Palestinians, evictions from Palestinian towns, and checkpoints that choke freedom of movement, as well as several Palestinian attacks on Israelis. More than 700,000 Israelis now live in the occupied West Bank and east Jerusalem, territories captured by Israel in 1967 and sought by the Palestinians for a future state. The international community overwhelmingly considers Israeli settlement construction in these areas to be illegal and an obstacle to peace. Israel's government is dominated by religious and ultranationalist politicians with close ties to the settlement movement. Smotrich, previously a firebrand settler leader and now finance minister, has been granted Cabinet-level authority over settlement policies and vowed to double the settler population in the West Bank. Israel has annexed east Jerusalem and claims it as part of its capital, which is not internationally recognized. It says the West Bank is disputed territory whose fate should be determined through negotiations. Israel withdrew from 21 settlements Gaza in 2005.
The Mainichi
12 hours ago
- The Mainichi
North Korean leader's sister says her country will never see the South as a diplomatic partner
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- The powerful sister of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said her country will never see South Korea as a partner for diplomacy, state media reported on Wednesday in what was her latest taunt of Seoul's new efforts to mend ties. Kim Yo Jong, who is one of her brother's top foreign policy officials, denounced the ongoing South Korea-U.S. military drills as a "reckless" invasion rehearsal and claimed Seoul's peace gestures conceal a "sinister intention" against Pyongyang. Her comments came during a meeting on Tuesday with senior Foreign Ministry officials about her brother's diplomatic strategies in the face of persistent threats from rivals and a rapidly shifting geopolitical landscape, the North's official Korean Central News Agency said. On Monday, Kim Jong Un condemned the South Korean-U.S. military drills and vowed a rapid expansion of his nuclear forces as he inspected his most advanced warship being fitted with nuclear-capable systems. The North's news agency said Kim Yo Jong condemned the South as the "top-class faithful dog" of the United States and that the reparation of inter-Korean relations desired by Seoul "will never" happen. The siblings' back-to-back statements followed the latest outreach by South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, who said last week that Seoul would seek to restore a 2018 inter-Korean military agreement aimed at reducing border tensions, while urging Pyongyang to reciprocate by rebuilding trust and resuming dialogue. Since taking office in June, Lee has moved to repair relations that worsened under his conservative predecessor's hard-line policies, including removing front-line speakers that broadcast anti-North Korean propaganda and K-pop. In a nationally televised speech Friday, Lee said his government respects North Korea's current system and that the wealthier South "will not pursue any form of unification by absorption and has no intention of engaging in hostile acts." But he also stressed that the South remains committed to an international push to denuclearize the North and urged Pyongyang to resume dialogue with Washington and Seoul. Angered by expanding South Korean-U.S. military drills, Kim Jong Un last year declared that North Korea was abandoning long-standing goals of a peaceful unification with South Korea and rewrote the North's constitution to mark the South as a permanent enemy. Kim Yo Jong has repeatedly dismissed calls to revive negotiations aimed at winding down the North's nuclear and missile programs, which derailed in 2019 following her brother's collapsed summit with U.S. President Donald Trump during his first term. Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Kim Jong Un has made Moscow the priority of his foreign policy, sending troops and weapons to support President Vladimir Putin's war, while also using the conflict as a distraction to accelerate his military nuclear program. In her meeting on Tuesday, Kim Yo Jong suggested that Pyongyang seeks to compete with Seoul diplomatically, claiming the South "will not even have a subordinate role in the regional diplomatic arena," which she claimed will be centered on the North.
