Brief History of the Status of Jerusalem

The 1947 UN Resolution 181, which called for the partition of Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state, also provided for the status of the Holy City. It was to be an international enclave, governed by an independent United Nations body. However, following the first Arab-Israeli war, the western part of Jerusalem was seized and occupied by the Israelis and the eastern part fell under Jordanian control. The United Nations and the Vatican kept up the call for a "corpus separatum," however, following the war the city remained divided between East and West.

Following the 1967 war, Israel occupied the West Bank and unilaterally annexed East Jerusalem, extending Israeli law, jurisdiction, and administration to East Jerusalem. The following day, Israel announced an expansion of the Jerusalem borders, dissolved the Arab municipal council and exiled the Arab mayor of Jerusalem. The UN Security Council rejected Israel's advancement on the eastern part of the city, declaring its actions to change the status of the city including, "expropriation of land and properties, transfer of populations and legislation aimed at the incorporation of the occupied section" as invalid. On July 30, 1980, the Israeli Knesset, led by Prime Minister Menachem Begin, adopted basic law, declaring Jerusalem, in its entirety, the capital of Israel. However, according to international law, this area is occupied territory. It has the same status as the rest of the West Bank. The application of Israeli law, in whole or in part, to the annexed city violates several international covenants and treaties.

There are three main issues regarding East Jerusalem and the surrounding areas and the Israeli government's policies towards Palestinians in these areas. The discriminatory housing and planning policies of the Israeli government, the revocation of East Jerusalem residency rights, and the policy of closure.

Housing and Planning Policies

In 1967, the Israeli government introduced a policy that would alter the population ratio of East Jerusalem, making it 76:24 Israeli to Palestinian. They invoked five planning policies to achieve and maintain this ratio.

1. Expand municipal boundaries to include Palestinian land, but exclude Palestinian population.
2. Expropriate Palestinian land for Israeli construction and limit Palestinian construction.
3. Exclude Palestinians from the process of municipal planning.
4. Keep Palestinian land as 'green area,' effectively saving it for Israeli developments.
5. Deny Arabs permits to build and consequently demolish unlicensed Palestinian homes to make way for future land confiscation's and Israeli settlement building.

Expanding the Boundaries

Following the 1967 war the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem were expanded from an area of 27,000 acres to include an extra 3,750 acres. This extension reached areas such as Beit Hanina and Abu Dis. Although these boundaries were expanded to confiscate as much Palestinian land as possible, they effectively avoided the highly populated areas to avoid including a large number of Palestinians into the expanded city. Approximately 80,000 people were excluded. Today, the Israeli government actively encourages the building of settlements on the confiscated lands of the greater Jerusalem area, which have up to this point, encompassed 25-30% of the West Bank.

Expropriating Land

Approximately half of the city of East Jerusalem was set aside for Jewish settlements and construction. 47% of the land was designated "green areas" prohibiting any development or building. The remaining land available to Palestinians for development is minimal, much of it is already built on. For the land that is vacant, building permits are nearly impossible to obtain. The designation of Jewish areas on Palestinian land has led to hundreds of Palestinian houses being demolished because they did not have a building license. The complex network of by-pass roads that connect Israeli settlements to each other has also led to land confiscation and house demolitions and the future of many Palestinian villages remains uncertain as a result of these by-pass roads. Many Palestinians will be forced to leave their villages once the network is complete as they will be in the path of the development and their homes will be in jeopardy.

Excluding Palestinians

The development of Israeli settlements is a highly secretive process and the Israeli government does not hold public consultations or meetings in which public protest can be adequately addressed. Palestinians who will lose land or their houses due to this development are usually informed after the process has been approved or projects proceed without official approval or while a court case is still pending.

In contrast, however, the Government of Israel and its military counterpart in the West Bank actively co-operate with allegedly 'private' institutions, namely the World Zionist Organisation and the Jewish Agency, in the planning and organisation of Jewish settlement. One notable example is the 'Seven Stars' chain of settlements, developed during Ariel Sharon's tenure as Housing Minister; promotion and planning of the seven colonies straddling the 'green line' were carried out jointly by the two parastatals.

Efforts to explain such discrimination experienced by indigenous Arab citizens as a spontaneous phenomenon inconsistent with the 'democratic character' of the state serve to divert attention from the institutionalised nature of discrimination.

Maintaining Green Areas

A common practice by the Israeli in the expanded East Jerusalem is to designate certain areas as nature reserves or 'green areas,' thus effectively paralyzing any Palestinian attempts to build there. However, if there is a need for Israeli housing, a new settlement can be started immediately as the Jerusalem municipal government simply eliminates the 'green areas.'

Demolishing Unlicensed Palestinian Homes

In order for a Palestinian to renovate or build a home they must obtain a permit from the Israeli authorities. Failure to do so can lead to a total or partial demolition of the structure. These permits are nearly impossible to obtain and the process can be very expensive, leaving many people no choice but to build illegally. In contrast to this, Jewish builders obtain permits with ease.

East Jerusalem Residency Rights

Following the 1967 annexation of East Jerusalem, Israel conducted a census and granted Israeli identity cards to East Jerusalem residents who were present at that time, effectively granting them Permanent Resident Status on their own land. Those residents who were absent when the census was taken lost their right to return to their homes. Their families were required to submit a request for family unification so they could live together in the city. Israel declared that East Jerusalem residents, who wanted to, could apply for Israeli citizenship, but for political reasons most of them declined.

The Permanent Resident Status granted to Palestinians is the same as the one granted to foreign citizens who come to live in Israel, thus treating Palestinians who have lived in East Jerusalem for generations, as immigrants.

The real fear stemming from the current status of East Jerusalem Palestinians is that the Israeli government could arbitrarily deport every Palestinian resident at a moments notice by revoking their Israeli identity card and thus their permanent residency status. The Israeli Ministry of the Interior grants permanent resident status and the Ministry is also responsible for the revocation of these rights, but is not required to explain or justify its actions.

In 1988, the Supreme Court ruled that by granting special status to Palestinian East Jerusalemites, they would be discriminating against non-Palestinian permanent residents, thus violating the principle of equality. Without a special type of citizenship or status, Palestinians are living at the good will of the Israeli officials.

Permanent Residents or Citizens

Permanent residency and citizenship are markedly different states. The main right granted permanent residents is the right to work and live in Israel. They are entitled to social benefits and are afforded the right to vote, but only in local elections. Unless both parents were born in East Jerusalem, permanent residency is not passed down to children. Permanent residents with a spouse from the occupied territories, Jordan or anywhere else must apply for family unification so they may live together in East Jerusalem.

Only citizens are granted the right to return to Israel. Israeli law stipulates specific instances in which the government may revoke citizenship, but there are no such stipulations for permanent residents, leaving the decision at the discretion of the Ministry of the Interior.

The ideology behind permanent residency is that it is a privilege and the government is under no obligation to provide it. The dichotomy arises when permanent residency is applied to Arab East Jerusalem residents, as they are the historical residents of the city. The Supreme Court's fear of discrimination between East Jerusalem Palestinian permanent residents and foreign permanent residents ignores the historical claims that Palestinians hold in the city.

The Policy of Closure

The Israeli government first implemented a policy of military closure on the West Bank in 1991 at the beginning of the Gulf War. They imposed several more over the ensuing years, each time preventing more and more Palestinians from entering Israel. In these early closures, the Israelis did not even issue permits to Palestinians who worked in Israel. The policy of permanent closure was imposed in 1993, effectively separating East Jerusalem residents and West Bank residents. In order to cross from the West Bank into Israel, Palestinians need a special permit usually reserved for work or school. These closures create economic hardships and cultural hardships as Palestinians are prevented from working in Israel and worshipping at their holiest sites in the Old City. The policy of closure also has effectively reduced contact between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. In order to drive through Israel to visit family in Gaza, West Bank residents must apply for a permit. The process involved in receiving this permit is lengthy, bureaucratic and arbitrary. In addition, few people actually succeed in obtaining a permit.

International Law and Israeli Violations

According to international law, East Jerusalem is occupied territory and Israel must respect the rights of the residents of this territory. According to article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, residents of an occupied territory are to be afforded the rights of the Convention regardless of the changes imposed by the occupying power, such as agreements between the two parties or annexation of part or all of the territory.

Among others, Israel is in violation of Article 49(1) of the Geneva Convention and Article 49(6), which forbid "individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations...", and the "deport[ation] or transfer... [of] parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

Israel's unilateral annexation of East Jerusalem and its attempts to alter the ethnic composition, physical character, and boundaries and legal status of the city, as demonstrated in the planning policies, violate, not only the Fourth Geneva Convention, but also the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), the Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and the Convention for the Rights of the Child (CRC).

The United Nations committees that monitor the implementation of the above mentioned conventions have repeatedly noted that Israel fails to comply with the provisions as they apply to the Occupied Territory. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination declared the Israeli Settlements as "illegal under International Law [and] also as obstacles to peace and to the enjoyment of human rights...." Israel's planning and housing laws were also condemned by the UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural rights. Forced evictions and inadequate housing for Palestinians in East Jerusalem are grave violations of this convention as well as the Convention for the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and the Convention for the Rights of the Child (CRC).

The continued violations of these conventions is also contrary to the Declaration of Principles signed in 1993 between the Palestinian Liberation Organization and the Israeli government. (Oslo I) Although not officially stated, international principles governing bilateral agreements such as the Declaration of Principles are clear that neither party to the agreement should alter the status of issues involved until final status can be agreed on. The perpetual alterations of the ethnic composition and boundaries of East Jerusalem are contrary to good-faith negotiations in regards to the Declaration of Principles.

The Effects of Israel's Policies

Since 1967, there have been mass emigrations of Palestinians from East Jerusalem, either by choice or by force. An estimation puts the total number at 50,000, which does not include family members attached to the emigrants. Other estimates put the number closer to 100,000.

The standard of living has steadily decreased for Palestinians living in East Jerusalem. Forced evictions, demolitions, and general insecurity have had a negative impact on individuals, families and communities. The socioeconomic effects of the Israeli occupation have led to a decreased level of education as children drop out of school early to help the family; girls marry at a younger age (avg. 15 years); and the health of the residents, especially children, is negatively effected. The population density for Palestinian residents is nearly twice that of the Israeli residents, further contributing to the deterioration of health and living conditions.

Conclusion

The status of Jerusalem is one of the most contentious issues between Israelis and the Palestinians. The history and religious significance of the city for all parties will make a solution difficult. Regardless of the historical and political turmoil surrounding the city, there is no justification for Israel's flagrant violations of human rights and international law. It is necessary for Israel to begin abiding by these laws and conventions in order to realise peace in the region. Without mutual respect between both parties, for human rights, the Jerusalem question will remain unanswered.