A Conflict Resolution for West Bank Settlements
Israel
and Palestine have a long history of conflicts and disputes. The focus of their
conflicts lies in the ownership of settlements in the West Bank, East
Jerusalem, and in the Golan Heights. Both countries intend to claim ownership
of these areas to the housing problem of their citizens. But there haven’t
reached a consensus between these two countries due to their complex historical
relations. Currently, Israel places its inhabitants in West Bank settlements
even though Palestine and the international organizations keep condemning its
illegal behaviors.
Since 1967 Six-Say War, Israel has owned
the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and in the Golan Heights. Settlements were built
in these regions for military outputs originally, then transferred into
civilian habitats. The government carried
out the “Drobles Plan” to establish large-scale settlements in the West Bank in order to prevent a Palestinian state with
the excuse of security. Also, the housing price in West Bank Settlements was
much lower than that in Israel. Thus, for the economic factor, the government
would like to place citizens in these
settlements to relieve the domestic housing pressure. Statistics show
that until 2014, Jewish settlers has lived in more than 102 officially
recognized settlements in the West Bank,
and more than 380,000 Israelis has lived in these settlements. According to the
Oslo II Accord, Israel wanted to limit the Palestinian power less than a state,
simply an entity of residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Thus,
the Israeli government arranged many military outposts in these settlements in order to supervise Palestinian citizens in
these areas. However, since the establishment of Palestine in 2002, Israel’s
use of settlements in the West Bank has been widely questioned and condemned. However,
the establishment of a Palestinian state was well acknowledged in 2002. And
military outposts established by the Israeli government were supposed to be
dismantled. Nevertheless, few outposts were removed. Instead, more new outposts
established. Both of these countries intend to claim ownership of settlements
in the West Bank.
On one side, the international community
supports Palestine and regards that Israel’s use of settlements in the West
Bank is illegal. The United Nations has repeatedly regarded that this
settlement violates the Fourth Geneva Convention which requires that the
occupying country shall not place its citizens into the territory it occupies. Israel’s
behaviors have violated Palestinian human and land rights. Thus, based on this
law, the international community requires Israel to transfer its citizens out
of these settlements. On the other side, the Israel government argues that all
authorized settlements are entirely legal in its ownership and Israel’s
behaviors are consistent with the international law. Israel doesn’t admit the
Fourth Geneva Convention, saying that its
provisions don’t suit for the practical situations regarding humanitarian
issues. Israel keeps arguing that these settlements have serious security
needs. The temporary use of land and buildings in these settlements mean to
meet these security needs, which is permissible under the international law.
The resolution of this conflict is to negotiate a deadline for Israel to transfer
its citizens out of settlements in the West Bank. Before Israel finishes the
transfer, the international community and Palestine could impose economic and
political pressures on Israel. The deadline aims at giving Israel enough time
to adjust according to its practical situations, not a compromise to its harsh
attitude. If there are really security
needs in these settlements, Palestine and the United Nations could offer
military help for Israel’s peaceful
transition.
In order
to implement this resolution, the United Union must organize
negotiations with Israel. The focus is not to dispute whether Israel has the
legal right to use settlements in the West Bank, but how long Israel needs to
transfer its citizens out of those settlements and if there is any trouble to
fulfill it. If Israel refuses to solve this conflict through negotiations, the
United Nations and Palestine could refuse
to admit Israel’s ownership of settlements in the West Bank and cut off
economic cooperation and political connections. If Israel has practical
concerns and troubles, like the security
problem, the United Nations and Palestine
could offer related assistances after negotiations.
